I think the issue of “multiple instances of dwc:MaterialSample representing a single lot” is different from “multiple individuals collectively representing a single instance of dwc:Organism”. They have some similar characteristics as issues, but the “Organism” thing causes more confusion with Taxon than the MaterialSample (Lot) thing does.
Aloha,
Rich
Richard L. Pyle, PhD
Senior Curator of Ichthyology | Director of XCoRE
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI 96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4115; Fax: (808) 847-8252
eMail: deepreef@bishopmuseum.org
BishopMuseum.org
Our Mission: Bishop Museum inspires our community and visitors through the exploration and celebration of the extraordinary history, culture, and environment of Hawaiʻi and the Pacific.
From: dwc-material-sample <dwc-material-sample-bounces@lists.tdwg.org> On Behalf Of Stan Blum
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 8:00 AM
To: John Wieczorek <tuco@berkeley.edu>
Cc: dwc-material-sample@lists.tdwg.org
Subject: Re: [dwc-material-sample] Draft doc on Organism, Occurrence, and MaterialSample
Yes, I also think the boundary between organism and taxon is important to get right. I'm not sure it belongs on this page, though one of the next scenarios I think does belong on this page is comes with "lots" -- multiple individuals together as one material sample. That starts to go the direction of taxon, but it might not get there until we begin talking about observations -- really large numbers of (or very endangered species!)
Does the organism - taxon distinction deserve its own "page"?
Very nice wiki page, Stan! Thanks for that.
One thing I wonder is whether we need to add Taxon to that list. I know that in discussions people have expressed conflicting opinions about whether there is a continuum from Organism to Taxon. If we can't dispel that, we'll have to conclude what that relationship actually is formally before we get very far with Organism. I don't want to spawn a discussion of that here in the mailing list, but I would really like to have that straight at the same time we try to make other definitions. Is it OK to get that into the mix?
Hi all,
While our discussions of issues have been very very helpful, they tend to stray from the original title of the issue. I think it would be helpful if we went at this with a bit more structure. I think the progress we've made indicates that we might be able to come to a consensus about the concepts Organism, Occurrence, and MaterialSample, and in particular, how they should be encoded so that they are correctly aggregated and interpreted by end users. So...
I've posted what we might use as a starter doc on the home page on our repository's wiki. But I think it would be far easier to comment and revise this in GoogleDocs. So I'd like to propose that the group create a GoogleDocs folder with everyone having edit rights. I'll invite you using the email address you've used to subscribe to the mailing list. If you prefer to use another account for GoogleDocs, please let me know (by direct reply) and I'll add that account as well. If editing takes off in the GoogleDoc, I'll delete that content from the wiki page as it gets out of date.
_______________________________________________
dwc-material-sample mailing list
dwc-material-sample@lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/dwc-material-sample