<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
David,<br>
<br>
We are certainly going to have to add registration keys very soon. It
is in plan.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Donald<br>
<br>
Shorthouse, David wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:000a01c80341$7a3636b0$6ea2a410$@ca" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I think a comprehensive registry of data providers, datasets and the
services built on them would go a long way to achieve what you are looking
for. To do that we need a good metadata profile for biodiversity data and
GBIF has identified this as a priority over the next year. We also need to
think beyond the immediate biodiversity realm to engage with the wider
geospatial community in such activities as GEOSS. We have already
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->registered
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">the GBIF data portal REST services in the GEOSS registry and I have
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->started
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">discussions with TDWG about getting their standards registered.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
[David Shorthouse wrote:]
Éamonn,
Of course it will be nice for everyone to play the same game. But, there
will always be dissenters who dream up their own API & ontologies or those
who haven't quite massaged their outputs to be fully compliant with whatever
spec is agreed upon. If you have a look at the example apps in
programmableweb, well over 70% of these use Google Map and many are quite
simple. [Aside: providers aren't really aggrandized here unless you consider
Google a provider. Rather, the focus is on the apps and how the data are
being repurposed.] I don't see any particular reason not to build something
like programmablebiodiversity.org now to see what people come up with using
existing services, especially if we now have the confidence to say these web
services can be the foundation upon which biodiversity-based mashups can be
erected. Do we yet have that confidence? If so then naturally, these
creative apps will become richer when and if we cement a common metadata
profile. But, how the services are being used now might just dictate how
they should be produced for widest use. And, it's not much of a stretch then
to surmise that what people do with the data will lead to adjustments in a
species profile model.
There are already some really cool things one can do with GBIF web services,
but is anyone tracking these? Unlike the Google Map API, there are no
registration keys to use these REST services. What about runaway scripts?
David
_______________________________________________
tdwg mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org">tdwg@lists.tdwg.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg">http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:dhobern@gbif.org">dhobern@gbif.org</a>)
Deputy Director for Informatics
Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat
Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
Tel: +45-35321483 Mobile: +45-28751483 Fax: +45-35321480
------------------------------------------------------------</pre>
</body>
</html>