September 2010 - tdwg-content

[tdwg-obs] TDWG mailing list consolidation
by Markus Döring (GBIF) 08 Sep '10

08 Sep '10

Dear members of the TDWG mailing list tdwg-obs, TDWG has seen a proliferation of mailing lists over the years, most of which are inactive today. Traffic on most lists is rather little and usually limited to only a short period of time. As most lists also have very much the same subscribers, we are seeking to merge lists into just a few ones. The main 3 mailing lists we want to maintain in the future being: tdwg(a)lists.tdwg.org A list with very low traffic for official TDWG announcements from the executive committee http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org A list for all non technical discussions covering all TDWG working groups / standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org The technical architecture group list that will host discussions about the technical details of standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag Within the next days we will automatically add all subscribers of this list to tdwg and tdwg-content and will merge all existing archives of the mailing list tdwg-obs into tdwg-content. The list tdwg-obs will be closed and removed once the archives have been merged. Best wishes, Markus Döring

1 0

[tdwg-ncd] TDWG mailing list consolidation
by Markus Döring (GBIF) 08 Sep '10

08 Sep '10

Dear members of the TDWG mailing list tdwg-ncd, TDWG has seen a proliferation of mailing lists over the years, most of which are inactive today. Traffic on most lists is rather little and usually limited to only a short period of time. As most lists also have very much the same subscribers, we are seeking to merge lists into just a few ones. The main 3 mailing lists we want to maintain in the future being: tdwg(a)lists.tdwg.org A list with very low traffic for official TDWG announcements from the executive committee http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org A list for all non technical discussions covering all TDWG working groups / standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org The technical architecture group list that will host discussions about the technical details of standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag Within the next days we will automatically add all subscribers of this list to tdwg and tdwg-content and will merge all existing archives of the mailing list tdwg-ncd into tdwg-content. The list tdwg-ncd will be closed and removed once the archives have been merged. Best wishes, Markus Döring

1 0

[tdwg-img] TDWG mailing list consolidation
by "Markus Döring (GBIF)" 08 Sep '10

08 Sep '10

Dear members of the TDWG mailing list tdwg-img, TDWG has seen a proliferation of mailing lists over the years, most of which are inactive today. Traffic on most lists is rather little and usually limited to only a short period of time. As most lists also have very much the same subscribers, we are seeking to merge lists into just a few ones. The main 3 mailing lists we want to maintain in the future being: tdwg(a)lists.tdwg.org A list with very low traffic for official TDWG announcements from the executive committee http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org A list for all non technical discussions covering all TDWG working groups / standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org The technical architecture group list that will host discussions about the technical details of standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag Within the next days we will automatically add all subscribers of this list to tdwg and tdwg-content and will merge all existing archives of the mailing list tdwg-img into tdwg-content. The list tdwg-img will be closed and removed once the archives have been merged. Best wishes, Markus Döring

1 0

[tdwg-geospatial] TDWG mailing list consolidation
by "Markus Döring (GBIF)" 08 Sep '10

08 Sep '10

Dear members of the TDWG mailing list tdwg-geospatial, TDWG has seen a proliferation of mailing lists over the years, most of which are inactive today. Traffic on most lists is rather little and usually limited to only a short period of time. As most lists also have very much the same subscribers, we are seeking to merge lists into just a few ones. The main 3 mailing lists we want to maintain in the future being: tdwg(a)lists.tdwg.org A list with very low traffic for official TDWG announcements from the executive committee http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org A list for all non technical discussions covering all TDWG working groups / standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org The technical architecture group list that will host discussions about the technical details of standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag Within the next days we will automatically add all subscribers of this list to tdwg and tdwg-content and will merge all existing archives of the mailing list tdwg-geospatial into tdwg-content. The list tdwg-geospatial will be closed and removed once the archives have been merged. Best wishes, Markus Döring

1 0

[Biogeosdi] TDWG mailing list consolidation
by "Markus Döring (GBIF)" 08 Sep '10

08 Sep '10

Dear members of the TDWG mailing list biogeosdi, TDWG has seen a proliferation of mailing lists over the years, most of which are inactive today. Traffic on most lists is rather little and usually limited to only a short period of time. As most lists also have very much the same subscribers, we are seeking to merge lists into just a few ones. The main 3 mailing lists we want to maintain in the future being: tdwg(a)lists.tdwg.org A list with very low traffic for official TDWG announcements from the executive committee http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org A list for all non technical discussions covering all TDWG working groups / standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org The technical architecture group list that will host discussions about the technical details of standards http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag Within the next days we will automatically add all subscribers of this list to tdwg and tdwg-content and will merge all existing archives of the mailing list biogeosdi into tdwg-content. The list biogeosdi will be closed and removed once the archives have been merged. Best wishes, Markus Döring

1 0

evil twin of "dcterms:replaces" in DwC rdf representation
by Bob Morris 07 Sep '10

07 Sep '10

dwcterms.rdf uses "rdfs:replaces" to implement the "Replaces" attribute of DwC term definitions. There is no rdfs:replaces in the RDFS recommendation. Probably what is desired is dcterms:replaces or, even better owl:PriorVersion, which will play nicely with reasoning on Annotation Properties. This matters if one is trying to make an OWL2 representation of DwC, which is very finicky about what Annotation Properties may be in the rdfs namespace (none, except as those listed in http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Annotation_Properties). Bob Morris -- Robert A. Morris Emeritus Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd Boston, MA 02125-3390 Associate, Harvard University Herbaria email: morris.bob(a)gmail.com web: http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/ web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram phone (+1) 857 222 7992 (mobile)

2 2

dwc:associatedOccurrences
by Mark Wilden 07 Sep '10

07 Sep '10

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:24 AM, John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu> wrote: > Note that associatedOccurrences is one of the several terms that are meant > to allow lists of relationships between resources to be captured in a single > field. Others include associatedMedia, associatedReferences, > associatedSequnces, and associatedTaxa. The main purposes of these fields is > to provide a mechanism to share relationship information in a flat > application profile such as the Simple Darwin Core > (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm). If an application profile > isn't constrained by being flat, then there is a much more robust way to > capture relationships, using the ResourceRelationship class and it's > constituent terms (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#relindex). However, the values of the description of the relationship (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#relationshipOfResource) are not controlled, so this still doesn't provide a "community-defined" vocabulary that Bob was asking about. ///ark Web Applications Developer Center for Applied Biodiversity Informatics California Academy of Sciences

5 17

Upcoming TDWG meeting
by Nico Cellinese 02 Sep '10

02 Sep '10

Hi all, we have reserved one full day for a Phylogenetics Standards hands-on activity at the upcoming TDWG conference. We asked for power strips and wireless network and tables that we can sit around and work together. The only thing that's missing right now is what exactly we should target. The options are wide open right now, with the two only major constraints being that (a) we have no funding this year to bring people in who wouldn't otherwise be there, and (b) abstract submission deadline is next Wednesday. Any feedback or ideas, wild or not, that you have would be welcome - send those our way. And BTW currently this workshops seems to be placed on the Wednesday of the conference week, so those of you blitzing the local biosphere will unfortunately have a conflict. Cheers, Nico & Hilmar <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Nico Cellinese, Ph.D. Assistant Curator, Herbarium & Informatics Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Biology Florida Museum of Natural History University of Florida 354 Dickinson Hall, PO Box 117800 Gainesville, FL 32611-7800, U.S.A. Tel. 352-273-1979 Fax 352-846-1861 http://www.flmnh.ufl.edu

6 8

Re: [tdwg-content] [tdwg-tag] Do terms in the http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ namespace actually resolve?
by Peter DeVries 01 Sep '10

01 Sep '10

Hi Steve, I originally replied to this in the tdwg-tag list, rather than the tdwg-content list. The resolvability of ontological terms is needed by services like Sindice to figure out how to interpret the RDF. As in this example: http://sig.ma/search?pid=02c02e379a5b11a344ed7519ff198222 Like Bob, I have also had problems incorporating the TDWG vocabulary into Protege, which is one reason that I had trouble getting it to work. My current thinking is that it might be best to keep the TDWG vocabulary as it is for submitting data to GBIF etc, while designing a more efficient vocabulary that works well on the LOD. By "efficient", I mean a vocabulary that uses standard resolvable URI's instead of literals for standard terms etc. This solution would also avoid the problem that Markus just mentioned. I am also wondering if the "individual" definition should be changed to mean one individual organism rather than a potential collection of individuals. Individuals from the same colony could be represented using a separate related vocabulary. Allowing multiple individuals will cause problems for consuming applications. For instance, is the queen a separate individual or not? How do you differentiate between a photo of the queen vs. a photo of one of the workers. There are also potential problems even if the individuals are all workers. I have been thinking that for some attributes like character states, it might be best to have a family level ontology. In this example, you might have a "formicidae_ontology", that could be used to deal with individuals from the same colony as well as ant specific character states. xmlns:ant="http://rs.gbif.org/family_ontology/ant.owl#" <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/individual/123412"> <ant:colonyMateOf rdf:resource="http://example.org/individual/123414"/> </rdf:Description> This could be defined as a subproperty of dc:relation or something similar in the gbif/tdwg vocabulary. <http://sig.ma/search?pid=02c02e379a5b11a344ed7519ff198222>- Pete On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu > wrote: > I was doing some GUID testing using a Linked Data client and I noticed > that some Darwin Core terms did not seem to resolve to anything. I ran > a test using > http://demo.openlinksw.com/rdfbrowser2/ > http://api.talis.com/stores/iand-dev1/items/dipper.html > http://www5.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/marbles/ > and > http://dataviewer.zitgist.com/ > I first I looked up > http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator > and all four clients reported the properties of the term. Then I tried > http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/basisOfRecord > and nothing happened with any of them. I ran a Vapour > http://validator.linkeddata.org/vapour > validation on the basisOfRecord URI and got the following message: > > Vapour was unable to complete the request due to the following exception: > > ForbiddenAddress: forbidden request from 98.87.45.8 to > http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/basisOfRecord (resolves to IP 192.38.28.106), > internal IP addresses are forbidden > > I have no idea what that means, but all of this seems to mean that > Darwin Core is currently "broken" from a Linked Data point of view. > > Steve > > -- > Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer > Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences > > postal mail address: > VU Station B 351634 > Nashville, TN 37235-1634, U.S.A. > > delivery address: > 2125 Stevenson Center > 1161 21st Ave., S. > Nashville, TN 37235 > > office: 2128 Stevenson Center > phone: (615) 343-4582, fax: (615) 343-6707 > http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu > > _______________________________________________ > tdwg-tag mailing list > tdwg-tag(a)lists.tdwg.org > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Pete DeVries Department of Entomology University of Wisconsin - Madison 445 Russell Laboratories 1630 Linden Drive Madison, WI 53706 TaxonConcept Knowledge Base <http://www.taxonconcept.org/> / GeoSpecies Knowledge Base <http://lod.geospecies.org/> About the GeoSpecies Knowledge Base <http://about.geospecies.org/> ------------------------------------------------------------

3 4