September 2003 - tdwg-content

DescriptoinML might be too broad Re: Name for the standard
by Karen E. Medina 16 Sep '03

16 Sep '03

All xml is descriptive. > DescriptionML ?

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Gregor Hagedorn 15 Sep '03

15 Sep '03

> >SDD stands for Structure of Descriptive Data - doesn't seem to me to > >do the job, and I just thought it would be sensible for the standard > >to have a different name from the group. > couldn't you just redefine the final product as 'Standard for > Descriptive Data', or if you want to be really creative and out there, > 'Descriptive Data Standard'? The workgroup name "Structure of descriptive data" was originally explicitly chosen to describe an analysis process, rather than the proposed standard. However, there is already some history of calling our thing "Structured Descriptive Data (SDD)". Used e.g. by Kevin Thiele, Bryan Heidorn, Donald Hobern... ! I think SDD may be a good option for a new standard name if no other term is really convincing. However, I also like Chucks idea of putting all TDWG/GBIF standards under a common roof very much. Without the TDWG subgroup 12 month later no decision yet extension, of course. Gregor ---------------------------------------------------------- Gregor Hagedorn (G.Hagedorn(a)bba.de) Institute for Plant Virology, Microbiology, and Biosafety Federal Research Center for Agriculture and Forestry (BBA) Koenigin-Luise-Str. 19 Tel: +49-30-8304-2220 14195 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49-30-8304-2203 Often wrong but never in doubt!

1 0

Re: XDELTA / RDF
by Gregor Hagedorn 15 Sep '03

15 Sep '03

Leigh Dodds wrote: > btw, where would look for an update/docs on the new > standard? I'm curious whether any consideration was > given to using RDF, which provides a good framework > for collating data about resources from multiple sources > and using multiple vocabularies. (For docs see http://160.45.63.11/Projects/TDWG-SDD/index.html. The minutes and xsd draft changes from Paris are not finished yet by me, however. Also Kevin is writing some introduction to the whole of SDD, that hopefully makes it easier to understand.) The application of RDF to SDD has been repeatedly discussed -- and is currently avoided. It probably would be a good thing, everybody agrees so, but most do not understand it well enough to really work with it or profit from the definitional documents. I failed to understand them. So we decided to try without RDF, rather than debating little understood things. Any review of our results from you would be great. If you can, come to Lisbon! Gregor ---------------------------------------------------------- Gregor Hagedorn (G.Hagedorn(a)bba.de) Institute for Plant Virology, Microbiology, and Biosafety Federal Research Center for Agriculture and Forestry (BBA) Koenigin-Luise-Str. 19 Tel: +49-30-8304-2220 14195 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49-30-8304-2203 Often wrong but never in doubt!

1 0

Re: BODDS Re: Name for the standard
by Jim Croft 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

>>>There is a plant ontology consortium (POC) that is involved in >>>trying to rationalise terminology used by Arabidopsis, Zea and >>>Oryza people, and by extension (I hope) more gererally in fl. pl. Have they published anything? URL? jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: BODDS Re: Name for the standard
by Jim Croft 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

>BODDS -Biological Ontological Descriptive Data Standard. It sounds kinda >sexy when you say BODDS outloud. Or very juvenile. Or both. well, if the shoe fits, I suppose we should wear it... or we could just call it Biological Ontology... :) nah... that one stinks... jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Jim Croft 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

>SDD stands for Structure of Descriptive Data - doesn't seem to me to do the >job, and I just thought it would be sensible for the standard to have a >different name from the group. couldn't you just redefine the final product as 'Standard for Descriptive Data', or if you want to be really creative and out there, 'Descriptive Data Standard'? >By the way, I'd better correct my last email. Make that a cheap bottle of >Portugues port. Well! That is one way to ensure that it stays as SDD! jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: BODDS Re: Name for the standard
by Vincent, Leszek 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

> -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Croft [mailto:jrc@ANBG.GOV.AU] > Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 8:24 AM > To: TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU > Subject: Re: BODDS Re: Name for the standard > > > >>>There is a plant ontology consortium (POC) that is > involved in trying > >>>to rationalise terminology used by Arabidopsis, Zea and > Oryza people, > >>>and by extension (I hope) more gererally in fl. pl. > > Have they published anything? URL? > > jim > > > ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~ > ==================================== Hi TDWG folk, "Has the Plant Ontology Consortium published anything? URL" Yes - for that info. & a whole lot more visit www.plantontology.org. Regards, - Leszek Vincent xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox P. Leszek D. Vincent Ph.D., FLS Plant Science Unit, Dept. of Agronomy, 209 Curtis Hall, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211-7020, USA. Ph: (573) 884-3716 (Agronomy); Fax:(573) 884-7850; Ph/Fax (Home): (573) 441-1228; Email: Leszek(a)missouri.edu Yahoo! Messenger: leszekvincent Plant Systematist on the Maize Mapping Project - NSF award 9872655 - (http://www.maizemap.org/ and http://www.agron.missouri.edu/) Associate Curator, Dunn-Palmer Herbarium (UMO) Research Associate, Missouri Botanical Garden, USA xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Kevin Thiele 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

SDD stands for Structure of Descriptive Data - doesn't seem to me to do the job, and I just thought it would be sensible for the standard to have a different name from the group. Of course, if we use SDD in the end, then the bottle of port is unclaimed. By the way, I'd better correct my last email. Make that a cheap bottle of Portugues port. -k ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Croft" <jrc(a)ANBG.GOV.AU> To: <TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU> Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 7:43 AM Subject: Re: Name for the standard > >By the way, there's a bottle of fine Portuguese port for whoever comes up > >with the final name. Of course, if no-one can come up with anything, the > >SDD group at Lisbon will have to drink the port as consolation. > > just our of interest, what was wrong with SDD? Is it really something that > needs a catchy name to market to the outside world? Won't it just become > part of the information infrastructure that everyone takes for granted? > > jim > > > ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Jim Croft 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

>Jim your skills are wasted. Get a real job! Unfortunately these days it is the real job that is wasting my skills... :( jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Jim Croft 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

>By the way, there's a bottle of fine Portuguese port for whoever comes up >with the final name. Of course, if no-one can come up with anything, the >SDD group at Lisbon will have to drink the port as consolation. just our of interest, what was wrong with SDD? Is it really something that needs a catchy name to market to the outside world? Won't it just become part of the information infrastructure that everyone takes for granted? jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0