September 2003 - tdwg-content

Re: BODDS Re: Name for the standard
by Peter Stevens 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. Peter S. >>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 Kevin Thiele 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

RE: Name for the standardso far, we have: BioDDS - (Chuck Miller) (spinning off to BDDS -> BDS -> BD -> D ->DELTA ->Jim Croft) BioDescML - (Chuck Miller) BioML - (Jim Croft) (taken - see xml.coverpages.org/bioml.html) BioTaxML - (Chuck Miller) CAML (Jim Croft) (taken - see http://www.vision.fhg.de/~veenhuis/CAML/) ExSDD - (Stan Blum) DescML - (Jim Croft) PanML (Nick Lander, who will undoubtedly pass the port to Richard Pankhurst) TDML - (Guillaume Rousse) TaxDescML - (Guillaume Rousse) xDELTA - (don't know who to give the port to for this one - maybe Mike Dallwitz) XSDD - (Bob Morris and Stan Blum) Keep them coming. There hasn't been so much traffic on the list for years! -k

1 0

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

11 Sep '03

RE: Name for the standardAn excellent suggestion - perhaps we need to set up a TDWG working group to consider this and report in 12 months time. 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. -k ----- Original Message ----- From: Chuck.Miller(a)MOBOT.ORG To: TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 3:43 AM Subject: Re: Name for the standard How many XML schemas are currently in work within TDWG(Collections, SDD, Economic Botany, Geography, Spatial Data) and GBIF(DADI, ECAT, and DIGIT)? Is there a way to unify them under some more universal schemaML naming approach? This seems like a unique moment in time to start a precedent. The GBIF Biodiversity Data Architecture document is replete with models of interfaces and web services that will all require new XML schemas to be created--each needing a name. GBIF also intends to add schemas for taxa, literature, gazeteers, indexes, providers, etc. Is there a way to be more universal in naming these schemas? The simple names like BioML, TaxML, etc. have already been used and are probably too general anyway. (OmniML?) One approach could be to concatentate dipthongs or something to create a schema of ML names. For example, BioDescML, BioTaxML, BioLitML. Or BioDML, BioTML, BioLML. Or GBIFDescML. Or TDWGDescML. Chuck Miller -----Original Message----- From: Jim Croft [mailto:jrc@ANBG.GOV.AU] Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 8:53 PM To: TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU Subject: Re: Name for the standard is DescML taken? jim >jrc> So what is it to be? BioML? > >preoccupied, although there in no strict registration mechanism except >its flavour in namespace. http://xml.coverpages.org/bioml.html ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

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

11 Sep '03

Jim your skills are wasted. Get a real job! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Croft" <jrc(a)ANBG.GOV.AU> To: <TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 7:46 AM Subject: Re: Name for the standard > >How about BIODDS - BIOlogical Descriptive Data Standard? > > or BDDS... > > but the data is probably a given in this day and age so we could get away > with BDS... > > .... > > but most people would probably refer to it as the 'BD standard' so we could > shorten it further to BD... > > and if we do the job properly and at the right level there is no reason why > it needs to be restricted to biology, so it could be the D standard... or D > > or Descriptive Ontology Integrating Taxonomy: DO IT > > Got it! ... Descriptive Environment for Large Taxonomic Arrays... > > now, where did I put those pills... > > jim > > > ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: Fwd: Rejected posting to TDWG-SDD@LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU (fwd)
by Jim Croft 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

>CAML is already a (excellent) programming language, see >http://caml.inria.fr/index-eng.html Damn... all the good ones are taken... story of my life... jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

BODDS Re: Name for the standard
by Karen E. Medina 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

BODDS -Biological Ontological Descriptive Data Standard. It sounds kinda sexy when you say BODDS outloud. Or very juvenile. Or both. I'd kinda liked the idea of doing something in latin. -karen medina On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Kevin Thiele wrote: > Jim your skills are wasted. Get a real job! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jim Croft" <jrc(a)ANBG.GOV.AU> > To: <TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU> > Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 7:46 AM > Subject: Re: Name for the standard > > > > >How about BIODDS - BIOlogical Descriptive Data Standard? > > > > or BDDS... > > > > but the data is probably a given in this day and age so we could get away > > with BDS... > > > > .... > > > > but most people would probably refer to it as the 'BD standard' so we > could > > shorten it further to BD... > > > > and if we do the job properly and at the right level there is no reason > why > > it needs to be restricted to biology, so it could be the D standard... or > D > > > > or Descriptive Ontology Integrating Taxonomy: DO IT > > > > Got it! ... Descriptive Environment for Large Taxonomic Arrays... > > > > now, where did I put those pills... > > > > jim > > > > > > ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~ > --------------------------->>>>>***<<<<<--------------------------- Karen E Medina Sometimes reachable through: 217/244-2757

1 0

Re: Fwd: Rejected posting to TDWG-SDD@LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU (fwd)
by Guillaume Rousse 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

Ainsi parlait Jim Croft : > >CAML is already a (excellent) programming language, see > >http://caml.inria.fr/index-eng.html > > Damn... all the good ones are taken... I forgot to say the camel symbol itself was already used by the Perl communauty :-P http://www.perl.org/ -- Suppressive fires -- won't -- Murphy's Military Laws n°3

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Cornelia Buchen-Osmond 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

RE: Name for the standardxDELTA was Leigh Dobbs invention as far as I understand. Dr Cornelia Büchen-Osmond Biosphere 2 Center 32540 S. Biosphere Road P.O. Box 689 Oracle, AZ 85623 U.S.A. Please note that our phone numbers have changed. Phone +1 (520) 838-5126 Fax +1 (520) 838-6214 email: buchen(a)bio2.columbia.edu ICTVdB - The Universal Virus Database home at Bio2 http://ictvdb.bio2.edu/ mirror in the USA http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ICTVdb/ mirror in the UK http://www.ictvdb.iacr.ac.uk/ mirror in China http://ictvdb.mirror.ac.cn/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Thiele To: TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 2:29 PM Subject: Re: Name for the standard so far, we have: BioDDS - (Chuck Miller) (spinning off to BDDS -> BDS -> BD -> D ->DELTA ->Jim Croft) BioDescML - (Chuck Miller) BioML - (Jim Croft) (taken - see xml.coverpages.org/bioml.html) BioTaxML - (Chuck Miller) CAML (Jim Croft) (taken - see http://www.vision.fhg.de/~veenhuis/CAML/) ExSDD - (Stan Blum) DescML - (Jim Croft) PanML (Nick Lander, who will undoubtedly pass the port to Richard Pankhurst) TDML - (Guillaume Rousse) TaxDescML - (Guillaume Rousse) xDELTA - (don't know who to give the port to for this one - maybe Mike Dallwitz) XSDD - (Bob Morris and Stan Blum) Keep them coming. There hasn't been so much traffic on the list for years! -k

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Jim Croft 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

>A little bureaucratic ... You need to get out more often ... tell me about it... :( jim ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0

Re: Name for the standard
by Chuck.Miller＠MOBOT.ORG 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

How many XML schemas are currently in work within TDWG(Collections, SDD, Economic Botany, Geography, Spatial Data) and GBIF(DADI, ECAT, and DIGIT)? Is there a way to unify them under some more universal schemaML naming approach? This seems like a unique moment in time to start a precedent. The GBIF Biodiversity Data Architecture document is replete with models of interfaces and web services that will all require new XML schemas to be created--each needing a name. GBIF also intends to add schemas for taxa, literature, gazeteers, indexes, providers, etc. Is there a way to be more universal in naming these schemas? The simple names like BioML, TaxML, etc. have already been used and are probably too general anyway. (OmniML?) One approach could be to concatentate dipthongs or something to create a schema of ML names. For example, BioDescML, BioTaxML, BioLitML. Or BioDML, BioTML, BioLML. Or GBIFDescML. Or TDWGDescML. Chuck Miller -----Original Message----- From: Jim Croft [mailto:jrc@ANBG.GOV.AU] Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 8:53 PM To: TDWG-SDD(a)LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU Subject: Re: Name for the standard is DescML taken? jim >jrc> So what is it to be? BioML? > >preoccupied, although there in no strict registration mechanism except >its flavour in namespace. http://xml.coverpages.org/bioml.html ~ Jim Croft ~ jrc(a)anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~

1 0