tdwg-content
Threads by month
- ----- 2024 -----
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2023 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2022 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2021 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2020 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2019 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2018 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2017 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2016 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2015 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2014 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2013 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2012 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2011 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2010 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2009 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2008 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2007 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2006 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2005 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2004 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2003 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2002 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2001 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 2000 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- July
- June
- May
- April
- March
- February
- January
- ----- 1999 -----
- December
- November
- October
- September
- August
- 1557 discussions
Dear all,
There is a proposal to deprecate the Darwin Core Type vocabulary term
dwctype:Location
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm#Location) and
instead recommend the Dublic Core equivalent
http://purl.org/dc/terms/Location.
Dublin Core has a broader scope than Darwin Core, and the Darwin Core
term was created for reasons that no longer apply.
Specifically, the Darwin Core Location term was created because the
Dublin Core Location term was not a Dublin Core type vocabulary term.
At the time, Darwin Core tried to use a combination of Dublin Core and
Darwin Core types as values for the basisOfRecord field, and wanted
them all to be in type vocabularies. This isn't necessary.
As this is a substantive semantic change (a term deprecation and new
recommendation to take its place), we must follow the Darwin
Core Namespace Policy's Term Change Policy, section 3.3, Semantic
changes in Darwin Core terms, which includes a minimum 30-day public
comment period beginning today.
The issue is further described on the Darwin Core Project issue
tracker at https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=173.
The proposal would deprecate the dwctype:Location in favor of a
dcterms:Location with the following definition:
Term Name: Location
Identifier: http://purl.org/dc/terms/Location
Namespace: http://purl.org/dc/terms/
Label: Location
Definition: A spatial region or named place.
Comment: For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/DwCTypeVocabulary (there will
be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2009-01-23
Date Modified: 2013-09-30
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/history/#Location-001
Replaces: Location-2009-01-23
IsReplaceBy:
Class:
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
If there are any objections this proposed change, please respond to this
message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
the public commentary period.
Cheers,
John
1
0
Some thoughts about usage of some of the terms under discussion and the ultimate goals
I often use the term "abundance" as a refinement of the term "occurrence".
I say "Species X occurs or does not occur at Location L. This kind of statement is refined with a statement such as "Females are rare in March" or "Juveniles are common or very abundant in July". The details of the life stage, timing and numbers of individuals or groups are more specific but still categorical.
I think of such statements as being derived from "expert opinion" or being summary statements based on enumerations from a series of samples taken during several field trips. I think these kinds of generalities are useful for policy making.
In terms of data, the simplest category is "presence only" data. Some times this is referred to as occurrence data - some number of individuals are seen at a particular time and location. Many museum records fall into this category as there is no other information associated with the specimen. Such records are equivalent to an incidental sighting by a field ecologist.
Today many biodiversity data are collect following a particular protocol. Here sampling effort is known. A specific number of individuals seen in a "given area" and during a known time interval. From this information one can compute population densities.
As several others have commented, the results are dependent on the particular protocols and it can be difficult to reconcile data from two different protocols. How are data from pitfall traps equivalent to data from baits.....? This is an important challenge because we know that usually one and often two protocols are insufficient to characterize the presence of all members of a taxon
If I am not mistaken, the goal is to establish terms that will let humans efficiently prepare data and write programs so that machines can reason with the data. If so, the key challenges seem to be
1) Distinguishing presence-only data from data collected using known protocols
2) Finding ways to reconcile data from different protocols
Rob Stevenson
Rob Stevenson
Biology Department
UMass Boston
5
4
Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance, abundanceAsPercent
by Ramona Walls 29 Sep '13
by Ramona Walls 29 Sep '13
29 Sep '13
I would not recommend making abundance a property of material sample,
because there are many cases where abundance would be used for observations
(such as in Hannu's most recent example) and not for material samples. Many
surveys are also observations, and not sampling events. While I sympathize
with Rob's point (somewhere down on this list) that scrunching too much
meaning into occurence is a problem, this is already the state of affairs.
I would contend that a survey is "evidence of an occurence in nature" so
abundance (when it is a property of a survey) is still a property of an
occurence.
In general, the notion of abundance is complex and context dependent, and
capturing that complexity is probably beyond the scope of a flat vocabulary
like Darwin Core. I am not opposed to adding abundance terms to Darwin
Core, and I think the proposals are getting close to a good way for doing
so. However, I think it is important to complement the DwC terms with a
more semantically rich vocabulary like Biological Collections Ontology
(BCO) or Population and Community Ontology. I would not call modeling
abundance a "trivial" use case for the Biological Collections Ontology
(BCO), but I would call it a central one.
Ramona
------------------------------------------------------
Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
Scientific Analyst, The iPlant Collaborative, University of Arizona
Laboratory Research Associate, New York Botanical Garden
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 3:00 AM, <tdwg-content-request(a)lists.tdwg.org>wrote:
> Send tdwg-content mailing list submissions to
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> tdwg-content-request(a)lists.tdwg.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> tdwg-content-owner(a)lists.tdwg.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of tdwg-content digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent (Hannu Saarenmaa)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 08:25:55 +0300
> From: Hannu Saarenmaa <hannu(a)bioshare.com>
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> To: 'TDWG Content Mailing List' <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
> Message-ID: <52466863.8050703(a)bioshare.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Basically I support the views of Aaike and Donald. Keep the quantity
> and unit separate. No need for special term for AbundanceAsPercentage,
> then.
>
> However, I am a bit uncertain whether "Abundance" is the right term.
> How about "Quantity"? It is more generic, and can be applied for
> example, to a catch of 1000 kg of fish and a harvest of 200 cubic meters
> of timber. "Abundance" is semantically not right for those measures.
>
> I also think that a range for the quantity is needed, to express
> uncertainty about the quantity. I saw about 1000 geese this morning,
> certainly more than 500 but less than 2000. Uncertainty is so common in
> sightings.
>
> Are we also going to deprecate "IndividualCount"? I hope so.
>
> Hannu
>
> --
>
> Hannu Saarenmaa, Research Director
> hannu.saarenmaa(a)helsinki.fi
> Mobile +358-50-4479668
>
> University of Eastern Finland
> School of Computing, SIB Labs, Joensuu Science Park
> L?nsikatu 15 (P.O. Box 111)
> FIN-80101 Joensuu
>
> www.digitarium.fi - Digitisation Centre of the Finnish Museum of Natural
> History and the University of Eastern Finland
> www.biovel.eu - Workflows for Scientific Research
> www.eubon.eu - EU BON - GEO BON - Data Integration and Interoperability
>
>
>
> On 2013-09-26 18:07, Donald Hobern [GBIF] wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rob.
> >
> > I understand your concern, but my concern is with the opportunities we
> > are currently missing to enable our occurrence mobilisation processes
> > to offer significantly more value in many contexts.
> >
> > Some of the problem may be in the use of the word "abundance". If we
> > understand "abundance" to refer to the size and density of a
> > population or species, then a survey may give us a workable measure we
> > can use to represent this. I am thinking of mobilisation of less
> > ambitious measurements of relative abundance of a taxon in any
> > sampling event or set of associated observations. I visit a reservoir
> > and follow some standard protocol and count 30 mallards and a single
> > gadwall. Today that might be exposed in simple Darwin Core as two
> > occurrence records, each of which might somehow include an
> > individualCount. In the absence of any other information, this count
> > information cannot be seen as much more than an anecdotal annotation.
> > If we understood that these two observations were part of a single
> > survey event associated with a protocol also used for some number of
> > other survey events for which we have observations, we could (in
> > principle) find more ways to explore the significance of the count and
> > use it to help to fine-tune distribution models and to enhance them to
> > indicate patterns of abundance. If we can find a way to do this
> > consistently for all types of biodiversity observation (malaise traps,
> > transects, expression of ITS or CO1 from environmental samples), a
> > large number of databases already contributing to GBIF and other
> > networks could immediately offer a richer view to users and analysts.
> >
> > I believe we could readily handle this with three properties that are
> > available for use with any occurrence -- a sampling event id, a
> > sampling protocol identifier (ideally a URL leading to information on
> > the protocol) and a relative abundance value within that sample. Any
> > occurrence record could include these fields if appropriate. Of
> > course more normalisation is possible, but DwC has never been about
> > full normalisation.
> >
> > We can debate which DwC classes ought to include support for such
> > elements. I personally think we've tied ourselves in unnecessary
> > knots with our use of Occurrences, Events, Material Samples, etc. I
> > wish we just had an agreed meta-model/ontology which provides a graph
> > of classes of interest to our domain (specimen, collection, taxon
> > concept, taxon name, locality, collector, etc.) and a set of uniquely
> > named properties each of which is associated with one of these classes
> > or links instances of these classes. Darwin Core should then allow
> > for the denormalised representation of any view corresponding to a
> > subgraph of that model. Occurrence, Event, etc. should then be names
> > for popularly-used subgraphs and should represent the logic for
> > unpacking those denormalised DwC records back into a graph of
> > meta-model objects (in other words they should express something like
> > what SPARQL query might be able to extract this kind of record from
> > data organised using the meta-model/ontology).
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> >
> > Donald
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
> > <mailto:dhobern@gbif.org>
> >
> > Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> >
> > GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> >
> > Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > *From:*robgur@gmail.com [mailto:robgur@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of
> > *Robert Guralnick
> > *Sent:* Thursday, September 26, 2013 4:37 PM
> > *To:* Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> > *Cc:* John Wieczorek; TDWG Content Mailing List
> > *Subject:* Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> > abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> >
> > I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am,
> > to be honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the
> > proposal. Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I
> > wonder if that make sense given the class definition "The category of
> > information pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a
> > collection, or in a dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is
> > abundance "evidence of an occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is
> > a property of a survey and its associated methodology and is based on
> > multiple occurrences that come from a sample and a definition of extent.
> >
> > It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the
> > occurrence class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in
> > DwC yet. Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is
> > ratified as a class within the Darwin Core?
> >
> > Best, Rob
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> > <dhobern(a)gbif.org <mailto:dhobern@gbif.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, John.
> >
> > You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
> > property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
> > Simple Darwin Core.
> >
> >
> > Donald
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org <mailto:
> dhobern(a)gbif.org>
> > Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> > GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> > Tel: +45 3532 1471 <tel:%2B45%203532%201471> Mob: +45 2875 1471
> > <tel:%2B45%202875%201471> Fax: +45 2875 1480 <tel:%2B45%202875%201480>
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: gtuco.btuco(a)gmail.com <mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com>
> > [mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com <mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com>] On
> > Behalf Of John
> > Wieczorek
> > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
> > To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> > Cc: aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be
> > <mailto:aaike.dewever@naturalsciences.be>; TDWG Content Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> > abundanceAsPercent
> >
> > Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
> > abundance,
> > abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
> >
> > If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
> > concepts
> > can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
> > (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
> > following properties?
> >
> > measurementType
> > measurementValue
> > measurementAccuracy
> > measurementUnit
> > measurementDeterminedDate
> > measurementDeterminedBy
> > measurementMethod
> > measurementRemarks
> >
> > The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
> > share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand
> > why, see
> > http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> > <dhobern(a)gbif.org <mailto:dhobern@gbif.org>>
> > wrote:
> > > Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> > > these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> > > of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> > > methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> > > Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> > > percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> > > impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> > > with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> > > particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
> > >
> > > I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> > > which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> > > the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> > > sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to
> > interpret and
> > handle it.
> > >
> > > Donald
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
> > <mailto:dhobern@gbif.org> Global Biodiversity
> > > Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> > > Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> > > Tel: +45 3532 1471 <tel:%2B45%203532%201471> Mob: +45 2875 1471
> > <tel:%2B45%202875%201471> Fax: +45 2875 1480 <tel:%2B45%202875%201480>
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> > <mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>
> > > [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org
> > <mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> > > Wever
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> > > To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu <mailto:tuco@berkeley.edu>; TDWG Content
> > Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> > > abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> > >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> > > proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
> > >
> > > Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> > > * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> > > * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> > > in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> > > ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
> > specific for %)?
> > >
> > > Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> > > the report?
> > >
> > > Thanks for considering this question.
> > >
> > > With best regards,
> > > Aaike
> > >
> > > John Wieczorek wrote:
> > >> Dear all,
> > >>
> > >> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> > >> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> > >> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> > >> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> > >> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
> > >> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
> > >>
> > >> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
> > >>
> > >> Term Name: abundance
> > >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
> > >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ <
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/>
> > >> Label: Abundance
> > >> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
> > >> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
> > >> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
> > >> can be used.
> > >> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
> > >> "24%". For discussion see
> > >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> > >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> > >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> > >> Refines:
> > >> Status: proposed
> > >> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
> > >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> > >> Has Domain:
> > >> Has Range:
> > >> Refines:
> > >> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
> > >> Replaces:
> > >> IsReplaceBy:
> > >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> > >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> > >>
> > >> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
> > >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
> > >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ <
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/>
> > >> Label: Abundance as Percent
> > >> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
> > >> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
> > >> sample.
> > >> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
> > >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> > >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> > >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> > >> Refines:
> > >> Status: proposed
> > >> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
> > >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> > >> Has Domain:
> > >> Has Range:
> > >> Refines:
> > >> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
> > >> Replaces:
> > >> IsReplaceBy:
> > >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> > >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> > >>
> > >> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> > >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
> > >> and
> > >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
> > >>
> > >> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
> > >> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
> > >> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
> > >> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> > >> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> > >> the public commentary period.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >>
> > >> John
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> tdwg-content mailing list
> > >> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org>
> > >> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> > >
> > > --
> > > Aaike De Wever
> > > BioFresh Science Officer
> > > Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> > > Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> > > tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90 <tel:%2B32%280%292%20627%2043%2090>
> > > mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93 <tel:%2B32%280%29486%2028%2005%2093>
> > > email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be
> > <mailto:aaike.dewever@naturalsciences.be>>
> > > skype: aaikew
> > > LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> > > BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> > > <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> > > Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > tdwg-content mailing list
> > > tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org>
> > > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org>
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
4
4
28 Sep '13
Dear all,
GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed during
the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
Term Name: abundance
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Abundance
Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
can be used.
Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
"24%". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2012-03-01
Date Modified: 2013-09-25
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: abundance-2013-09-25
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Abundance as Percent
Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
sample.
Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2012-08-01
Date Modified: 2013-09-25
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
and
https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
the public commentary period.
Cheers,
John
8
18
Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance, abundanceAsPercent
by Éamonn Ó Tuama [GBIF] 27 Sep '13
by Éamonn Ó Tuama [GBIF] 27 Sep '13
27 Sep '13
Aaike's suggestion of using the abundance field to store just the numeric
value and then provide another field called abundanceUnit/abundanceType to
specify what the value is does look like it might be a more workable,
machine processable solution. It would, of course, require that the value be
selected from a controlled list. At a guess, I do not think that list would
be very long but we would need to define it in association with the property
abundanceUnit/abundanceType.
Eamonn
> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
specific for %)?
-----Original Message-----
From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
[mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of
tdwg-content-request(a)lists.tdwg.org
Sent: 26 September 2013 17:23
To: tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
Subject: tdwg-content Digest, Vol 53, Issue 2
Send tdwg-content mailing list submissions to
tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tdwg-content-request(a)lists.tdwg.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
tdwg-content-owner(a)lists.tdwg.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of tdwg-content digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
(John Wieczorek)
2. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
(John Wieczorek)
3. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
4. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Donald Hobern [GBIF])
5. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Robert Guralnick)
6. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Chuck Miller)
7. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Donald Hobern [GBIF])
8. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
9. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
10. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Robert Guralnick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:44:34 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental
terms from ENVO
To: Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdOf7rMwQ3UCGGw1T53c4J7X=amJ_ibSkSX_WSb5EoqcA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Dear all,
The spirit of the proposal is to satisfy use cases defined in the
document "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" found at
http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 by reusing terms from the ENVO
ontology. Steve is correct. All of the ENVO terms are classes in
keeping with the OBO Foundry way of doing things. As such, they don't
work in the intended Darwin Core context as they currently stand,
where what we want are properties whose values can come from ENVO as a
controlled vocabulary in the way Hilmar described.
To satisfy the spirit of the proposal, I suggest that instead of
replacing the dwc:habitat property with the envo:habitat class and
adding the other three ENVO classes, we modify the existing
dwc:habitat property and introduce new properties whose ranges are
recommended to be the appropriate ENVO classes, as follows:
Retain the property term dwc:habitat, but amend the definition to be:
Term Name: habitat
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Habitat
Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
sustain an organism or a community of organisms. Recommended best
practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
habitat class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2008-11-19
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: habitat-2013-09-26
Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Add the following new property terms for biome,
environmental feature, and environmental material:
Term Name: biome
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Biome
Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
ecological succession and climax vegetation. Recommended best practice
is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class
of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: biome-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: environmentalFeature
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Environmental Feature
Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
characteristic of a biome. Recommended best practice is to use a
controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature
class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "meadow",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: environmentalFeature-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: environmentalMaterial
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Environmental Material
Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live. Recommended
best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "scum",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: environmentalMaterial-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
I hope this makes better sense.
Cheers,
John
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steve Baskauf
<steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
> Well, the proposal says "The Darwin Core term habitat would be
redefined..."
> . I take that to mean that the term dwc:habitat is being replaced with
> envo:00002036 . If that's not what it means, then it would be good to
> clarify. If the intention is to provide values for other terms, that
should
> be stated.
>
> Steve
>
>
> Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>
> I was assuming that the proposal was that subclasses of envo:habitat would
> take the place of values for the dwc:habitat property. But perhaps I was
> naive or misunderstanding?
>
> -hilmar
>
> Sent from away
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
> wrote:
>
> OK, now that I've had a chance to look at the RDF, it is as I suspected.
If
> I am understanding the proposal correctly, the proposal is to replace the
> term <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat> (i.e. dwc:habitat) with the
term
> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036> (which I'll call
> envo:00002036 for brevity) However, the definition of dwc:habitat which
you
> can view at
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwcterms.rdf
> says
>
> dwc:habitat rdf:type rdfs:Property
>
> whereas the document I received at the end of those four redirects tells
me
> that
>
> envo:00002036 rdf:type owl:Class
>
> Since
>
> owl:Class rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:Class
>
> then we are effectively changing the current DwC "habitat" term from a
> property into a class similar to dwc:Occurrence, dwc:Identification,
> dwc:Taxon, etc. which are all of type rdfs:Class.
>
> So I'm left wondering what I can do with the new term. With the old term
I
> could make a statement like
>
> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> dwc:habitat "deciduous
> forest"
>
> or something like that if I take the hint from the DwC class groupings
that
> dwc:habitat might be a property of dwc:Event instances. But I can't
> meaningfully say
>
> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> envo:00002036
> "deciduous forest"
>
> That doesn't make any sense because the way I understand RDF, predicates
> should be properties, not classes. Even if we weren't talking about RDF,
> I'd still have the same problem (we are changing a property into a class)
-
> it's just easier for me to make plain what the issue is by giving RDF
> examples. So just exactly what can I "do" with envo:00002036 ?????
>
> I haven't looked up the RDF for the other proposed terms (too much work
with
> the four redirects), but I suspect if I did, I'd find that they are also
> classes and not properties. This particular issue is a case of a broader
> issue that I have about OBO-style ontologies. They are great for defining
> how many, many kinds of classes are related to each other. But they
provide
> very few properties that could be used as predicates to serve as
properties
> of instance data.
>
> Steve
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> minimum 30-day comment period on the new environmental terms proposed
> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>
> The formal proposal would change the term habitat to align it with the
> ENVO habitat term. The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker
> is https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=178. The
> Darwin Core term habitat would be redefined as follows:
>
> Term Name: habitat
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Habitat
> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
> sustain an organism or a community of organisms.
> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> The formal proposal would add the following new terms for biome,
> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>
> Term Name: biome
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Biome
> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
> ecological succession and climax vegetation.
> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmental feature
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Environmental Feature
> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
> characteristic of a biome.
> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmental material
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Environmental Material
> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live.
> Comment: Examples: "scum",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=189
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=190
> and
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=191
>
> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these terms,
> or comments about their definitions, please respond to this message.
> If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on any
> amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> the public commentary period.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> .
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>
> postal mail address:
> PMB 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) 322-4942
> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
> --
> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>
> postal mail address:
> PMB 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) 322-4942
> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:51:13 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental
terms from ENVO
To: Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdARDj32v9EPaofwHrzwonQ3czgwMaiyDmnj3c7L0tMnA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I've been in communication with the OBO-ENVO group
(obo-envo(a)lists.sourceforge.net) about the proposed re-use of the ENVO
terms. The ENVO ontology remains in active development, with a
proposed forthcoming guide on how to use ENVO. I have agreed to
forward an invitation extended by Pier Buttigieg to the TDWG community
to actively contribute.
"To be clear, the habitat class itself isn't queued for obsoletion, but its
current subclasses are. Once habitat is better-defined, new subclasses will
be created. If anyone in TDWG wishes to help shape the definition of this
concept or share any observations to promote its usefulness to the
biodiversity community we're certainly open to input."
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The spirit of the proposal is to satisfy use cases defined in the
> document "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" found at
> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 by reusing terms from the ENVO
> ontology. Steve is correct. All of the ENVO terms are classes in
> keeping with the OBO Foundry way of doing things. As such, they don't
> work in the intended Darwin Core context as they currently stand,
> where what we want are properties whose values can come from ENVO as a
> controlled vocabulary in the way Hilmar described.
>
> To satisfy the spirit of the proposal, I suggest that instead of
> replacing the dwc:habitat property with the envo:habitat class and
> adding the other three ENVO classes, we modify the existing
> dwc:habitat property and introduce new properties whose ranges are
> recommended to be the appropriate ENVO classes, as follows:
>
> Retain the property term dwc:habitat, but amend the definition to be:
>
> Term Name: habitat
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Habitat
> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
> sustain an organism or a community of organisms. Recommended best
> practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
> habitat class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: habitat-2013-09-26
> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Add the following new property terms for biome,
> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>
> Term Name: biome
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Biome
> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
> ecological succession and climax vegetation. Recommended best practice
> is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class
> of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: biome-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmentalFeature
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Environmental Feature
> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
> characteristic of a biome. Recommended best practice is to use a
> controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature
> class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: environmentalFeature-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmentalMaterial
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Environmental Material
> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live. Recommended
> best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
> environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "scum",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: environmentalMaterial-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> I hope this makes better sense.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steve Baskauf
> <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
>> Well, the proposal says "The Darwin Core term habitat would be
redefined..."
>> . I take that to mean that the term dwc:habitat is being replaced with
>> envo:00002036 . If that's not what it means, then it would be good to
>> clarify. If the intention is to provide values for other terms, that
should
>> be stated.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>>
>> I was assuming that the proposal was that subclasses of envo:habitat
would
>> take the place of values for the dwc:habitat property. But perhaps I was
>> naive or misunderstanding?
>>
>> -hilmar
>>
>> Sent from away
>>
>> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> OK, now that I've had a chance to look at the RDF, it is as I suspected.
If
>> I am understanding the proposal correctly, the proposal is to replace the
>> term <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat> (i.e. dwc:habitat) with the
term
>> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036> (which I'll call
>> envo:00002036 for brevity) However, the definition of dwc:habitat which
you
>> can view at
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwcterms.rdf
>> says
>>
>> dwc:habitat rdf:type rdfs:Property
>>
>> whereas the document I received at the end of those four redirects tells
me
>> that
>>
>> envo:00002036 rdf:type owl:Class
>>
>> Since
>>
>> owl:Class rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:Class
>>
>> then we are effectively changing the current DwC "habitat" term from a
>> property into a class similar to dwc:Occurrence, dwc:Identification,
>> dwc:Taxon, etc. which are all of type rdfs:Class.
>>
>> So I'm left wondering what I can do with the new term. With the old term
I
>> could make a statement like
>>
>> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> dwc:habitat
"deciduous
>> forest"
>>
>> or something like that if I take the hint from the DwC class groupings
that
>> dwc:habitat might be a property of dwc:Event instances. But I can't
>> meaningfully say
>>
>> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> envo:00002036
>> "deciduous forest"
>>
>> That doesn't make any sense because the way I understand RDF, predicates
>> should be properties, not classes. Even if we weren't talking about RDF,
>> I'd still have the same problem (we are changing a property into a class)
-
>> it's just easier for me to make plain what the issue is by giving RDF
>> examples. So just exactly what can I "do" with envo:00002036 ?????
>>
>> I haven't looked up the RDF for the other proposed terms (too much work
with
>> the four redirects), but I suspect if I did, I'd find that they are also
>> classes and not properties. This particular issue is a case of a broader
>> issue that I have about OBO-style ontologies. They are great for
defining
>> how many, many kinds of classes are related to each other. But they
provide
>> very few properties that could be used as predicates to serve as
properties
>> of instance data.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> John Wieczorek wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on the new environmental terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would change the term habitat to align it with the
>> ENVO habitat term. The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker
>> is https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=178. The
>> Darwin Core term habitat would be redefined as follows:
>>
>> Term Name: habitat
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Habitat
>> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
>> sustain an organism or a community of organisms.
>> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
>> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms for biome,
>> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>>
>> Term Name: biome
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Biome
>> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
>> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
>> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
>> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
>> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
>> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
>> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
>> ecological succession and climax vegetation.
>> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: environmental feature
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Environmental Feature
>> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
>> characteristic of a biome.
>> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: environmental material
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Environmental Material
>> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live.
>> Comment: Examples: "scum",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=189
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=190
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=191
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these terms,
>> or comments about their definitions, please respond to this message.
>> If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on any
>> amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
>> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>>
>> postal mail address:
>> PMB 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) 322-4942
>> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
>> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
>> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>>
>> postal mail address:
>> PMB 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) 322-4942
>> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
>> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:48:16 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdrmyEAwZ-TcTxUqcdGemwc330_H51XUTo9abb0Mez8-g(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance, abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could
not share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To
understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make these
> terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out of records
> that can be compared with one another where sampling methods allow such
> comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for Abundance don't make
> this possible. Forcing normalisation into percentages seems an
unnecessary
> hurdle and risks encouraging the impression that number of ducks on a
> reservoir is somehow comparable with percentage dry mass, proportional
> expression of CO1 for a particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or
> whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field which
the
> data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is the most
> appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the sample. That
gives
> consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is in %
> of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l, ind./m^2,
ind/m^3,
> ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in the
> report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed during
>> the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 16:01:10 +0200
From: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Cc: 'TDWG Content Mailing List' <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID: <01fd01cebac0$da9a8550$8fcf8ff0$(a)gbif.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks, John.
You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
Simple Darwin Core.
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: gtuco.btuco(a)gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com] On Behalf Of John
Wieczorek
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc: aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of abundance,
abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the concepts
can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and
handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> the report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:37:15 -0600
From: Robert Guralnick <Robert.Guralnick(a)colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CADAgxGX=ZRknz2T-kd0e9wwwP72pSrtoeRVb175fm1EQQ7iovQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to be
honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
make sense given the class definition "The category of information
pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in a
dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and its
associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come from
a sample and a definition of extent.
It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
class within the Darwin Core?
Best, Rob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
<dhobern(a)gbif.org>wrote:
> Thanks, John.
>
> You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
> property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
> Simple Darwin Core.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gtuco.btuco(a)gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> John
> Wieczorek
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> Cc: aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance,
> abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
>
> If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts
> can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
> following properties?
>
> measurementType
> measurementValue
> measurementAccuracy
> measurementUnit
> measurementDeterminedDate
> measurementDeterminedBy
> measurementMethod
> measurementRemarks
>
> The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
> share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why,
> see
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
> wrote:
> > Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> > these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> > of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> > methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> > Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> > percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> > impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> > with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> > particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
> >
> > I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> > which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> > the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> > sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret
and
> handle it.
> >
> > Donald
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> > Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> > Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> > Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> > [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> > Wever
> > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> > To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> > abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> > proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
> >
> > Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> > * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> > * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> > in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> > ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
> specific for %)?
> >
> > Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> > the report?
> >
> > Thanks for considering this question.
> >
> > With best regards,
> > Aaike
> >
> > John Wieczorek wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> >> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> >> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> >> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> >> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
> >> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
> >>
> >> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
> >>
> >> Term Name: abundance
> >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
> >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >> Label: Abundance
> >> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
> >> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
> >> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
> >> can be used.
> >> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
> >> "24%". For discussion see
> >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >> Refines:
> >> Status: proposed
> >> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
> >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >> Has Domain:
> >> Has Range:
> >> Refines:
> >> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
> >> Replaces:
> >> IsReplaceBy:
> >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>
> >> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
> >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
> >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >> Label: Abundance as Percent
> >> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
> >> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
> >> sample.
> >> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
> >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >> Refines:
> >> Status: proposed
> >> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
> >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >> Has Domain:
> >> Has Range:
> >> Refines:
> >> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
> >> Replaces:
> >> IsReplaceBy:
> >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>
> >> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
> >> and
> >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
> >>
> >> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
> >> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
> >> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
> >> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> >> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> >> the public commentary period.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tdwg-content mailing list
> >> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> >> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> > --
> > Aaike De Wever
> > BioFresh Science Officer
> > Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> > Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> > tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> > mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> > email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be>
> > skype: aaikew
> > LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> > BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> > <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> > Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
1
0
Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
by Éamonn Ó Tuama [GBIF] 27 Sep '13
by Éamonn Ó Tuama [GBIF] 27 Sep '13
27 Sep '13
The DwC workshop report in which the use of ENVO terms was discussed clearly
distinguished between properties and classes. The revised proposal by John
in which dwc:habitat is retained and three new properties created (material,
environmental feature, biome) whose ranges are drawn from the equivalent
ENVO classes meets the proposal outlined in the report.
----from DwC workshop report (http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 )----
Habitat and ENVO
The Environment Ontology (ENVO) [10] provides a more granular way of
referring to the environment in which an organism lives than is currently
possible with the Darwin Core habitat term. In addition to “habitat”
(http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036), ENVO provides three broad
classifications for environment - biome, feature, and material... The
advantage of integrating Darwin Core with ENVO is that it provides a
mechanism for integrating environmental descriptions for a broad range of
species. Further, ENVO provides distinct URIs that can be used to denote the
exact material, feature, or biome in question, making the content more
semantically precise. Thus, it is recommended that the value of the Darwin
Core habitat property be selected from the ENVO habitat class... It is also
recommended that Darwin Core include three new properties (environmental
material, environmental feature, and biome), the recommended vocabulary for
which should be from the equivalent ENVO classes.
Éamonn
-----Original Message-----
From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
[mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of
tdwg-content-request(a)lists.tdwg.org
Sent: 26 September 2013 17:23
To: tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
Subject: tdwg-content Digest, Vol 53, Issue 2
Send tdwg-content mailing list submissions to
tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tdwg-content-request(a)lists.tdwg.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
tdwg-content-owner(a)lists.tdwg.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of tdwg-content digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
(John Wieczorek)
2. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
(John Wieczorek)
3. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
4. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Donald Hobern [GBIF])
5. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Robert Guralnick)
6. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Chuck Miller)
7. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Donald Hobern [GBIF])
8. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
9. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
10. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Robert Guralnick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:44:34 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental
terms from ENVO
To: Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdOf7rMwQ3UCGGw1T53c4J7X=amJ_ibSkSX_WSb5EoqcA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Dear all,
The spirit of the proposal is to satisfy use cases defined in the
document "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" found at
http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 by reusing terms from the ENVO
ontology. Steve is correct. All of the ENVO terms are classes in
keeping with the OBO Foundry way of doing things. As such, they don't
work in the intended Darwin Core context as they currently stand,
where what we want are properties whose values can come from ENVO as a
controlled vocabulary in the way Hilmar described.
To satisfy the spirit of the proposal, I suggest that instead of
replacing the dwc:habitat property with the envo:habitat class and
adding the other three ENVO classes, we modify the existing
dwc:habitat property and introduce new properties whose ranges are
recommended to be the appropriate ENVO classes, as follows:
Retain the property term dwc:habitat, but amend the definition to be:
Term Name: habitat
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Habitat
Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
sustain an organism or a community of organisms. Recommended best
practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
habitat class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2008-11-19
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: habitat-2013-09-26
Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Add the following new property terms for biome,
environmental feature, and environmental material:
Term Name: biome
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Biome
Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
ecological succession and climax vegetation. Recommended best practice
is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class
of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: biome-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: environmentalFeature
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Environmental Feature
Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
characteristic of a biome. Recommended best practice is to use a
controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature
class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "meadow",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: environmentalFeature-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: environmentalMaterial
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Environmental Material
Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live. Recommended
best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "scum",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: environmentalMaterial-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
I hope this makes better sense.
Cheers,
John
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steve Baskauf
<steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
> Well, the proposal says "The Darwin Core term habitat would be
redefined..."
> . I take that to mean that the term dwc:habitat is being replaced with
> envo:00002036 . If that's not what it means, then it would be good to
> clarify. If the intention is to provide values for other terms, that
should
> be stated.
>
> Steve
>
>
> Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>
> I was assuming that the proposal was that subclasses of envo:habitat would
> take the place of values for the dwc:habitat property. But perhaps I was
> naive or misunderstanding?
>
> -hilmar
>
> Sent from away
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
> wrote:
>
> OK, now that I've had a chance to look at the RDF, it is as I suspected.
If
> I am understanding the proposal correctly, the proposal is to replace the
> term <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat> (i.e. dwc:habitat) with the
term
> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036> (which I'll call
> envo:00002036 for brevity) However, the definition of dwc:habitat which
you
> can view at
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwcterms.rdf
> says
>
> dwc:habitat rdf:type rdfs:Property
>
> whereas the document I received at the end of those four redirects tells
me
> that
>
> envo:00002036 rdf:type owl:Class
>
> Since
>
> owl:Class rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:Class
>
> then we are effectively changing the current DwC "habitat" term from a
> property into a class similar to dwc:Occurrence, dwc:Identification,
> dwc:Taxon, etc. which are all of type rdfs:Class.
>
> So I'm left wondering what I can do with the new term. With the old term
I
> could make a statement like
>
> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> dwc:habitat "deciduous
> forest"
>
> or something like that if I take the hint from the DwC class groupings
that
> dwc:habitat might be a property of dwc:Event instances. But I can't
> meaningfully say
>
> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> envo:00002036
> "deciduous forest"
>
> That doesn't make any sense because the way I understand RDF, predicates
> should be properties, not classes. Even if we weren't talking about RDF,
> I'd still have the same problem (we are changing a property into a class)
-
> it's just easier for me to make plain what the issue is by giving RDF
> examples. So just exactly what can I "do" with envo:00002036 ?????
>
> I haven't looked up the RDF for the other proposed terms (too much work
with
> the four redirects), but I suspect if I did, I'd find that they are also
> classes and not properties. This particular issue is a case of a broader
> issue that I have about OBO-style ontologies. They are great for defining
> how many, many kinds of classes are related to each other. But they
provide
> very few properties that could be used as predicates to serve as
properties
> of instance data.
>
> Steve
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> minimum 30-day comment period on the new environmental terms proposed
> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>
> The formal proposal would change the term habitat to align it with the
> ENVO habitat term. The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker
> is https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=178. The
> Darwin Core term habitat would be redefined as follows:
>
> Term Name: habitat
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Habitat
> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
> sustain an organism or a community of organisms.
> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> The formal proposal would add the following new terms for biome,
> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>
> Term Name: biome
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Biome
> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
> ecological succession and climax vegetation.
> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmental feature
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Environmental Feature
> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
> characteristic of a biome.
> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmental material
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Environmental Material
> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live.
> Comment: Examples: "scum",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=189
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=190
> and
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=191
>
> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these terms,
> or comments about their definitions, please respond to this message.
> If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on any
> amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> the public commentary period.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> .
>
>
>
>
> --
> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>
> postal mail address:
> PMB 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) 322-4942
> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
> --
> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>
> postal mail address:
> PMB 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) 322-4942
> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:51:13 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental
terms from ENVO
To: Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdARDj32v9EPaofwHrzwonQ3czgwMaiyDmnj3c7L0tMnA(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I've been in communication with the OBO-ENVO group
(obo-envo(a)lists.sourceforge.net) about the proposed re-use of the ENVO
terms. The ENVO ontology remains in active development, with a
proposed forthcoming guide on how to use ENVO. I have agreed to
forward an invitation extended by Pier Buttigieg to the TDWG community
to actively contribute.
"To be clear, the habitat class itself isn't queued for obsoletion, but its
current subclasses are. Once habitat is better-defined, new subclasses will
be created. If anyone in TDWG wishes to help shape the definition of this
concept or share any observations to promote its usefulness to the
biodiversity community we're certainly open to input."
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The spirit of the proposal is to satisfy use cases defined in the
> document "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" found at
> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 by reusing terms from the ENVO
> ontology. Steve is correct. All of the ENVO terms are classes in
> keeping with the OBO Foundry way of doing things. As such, they don't
> work in the intended Darwin Core context as they currently stand,
> where what we want are properties whose values can come from ENVO as a
> controlled vocabulary in the way Hilmar described.
>
> To satisfy the spirit of the proposal, I suggest that instead of
> replacing the dwc:habitat property with the envo:habitat class and
> adding the other three ENVO classes, we modify the existing
> dwc:habitat property and introduce new properties whose ranges are
> recommended to be the appropriate ENVO classes, as follows:
>
> Retain the property term dwc:habitat, but amend the definition to be:
>
> Term Name: habitat
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Habitat
> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
> sustain an organism or a community of organisms. Recommended best
> practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
> habitat class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: habitat-2013-09-26
> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Add the following new property terms for biome,
> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>
> Term Name: biome
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Biome
> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
> ecological succession and climax vegetation. Recommended best practice
> is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class
> of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: biome-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmentalFeature
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Environmental Feature
> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
> characteristic of a biome. Recommended best practice is to use a
> controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature
> class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: environmentalFeature-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmentalMaterial
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Environmental Material
> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live. Recommended
> best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
> environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "scum",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: environmentalMaterial-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> I hope this makes better sense.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steve Baskauf
> <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
>> Well, the proposal says "The Darwin Core term habitat would be
redefined..."
>> . I take that to mean that the term dwc:habitat is being replaced with
>> envo:00002036 . If that's not what it means, then it would be good to
>> clarify. If the intention is to provide values for other terms, that
should
>> be stated.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>>
>> I was assuming that the proposal was that subclasses of envo:habitat
would
>> take the place of values for the dwc:habitat property. But perhaps I was
>> naive or misunderstanding?
>>
>> -hilmar
>>
>> Sent from away
>>
>> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf(a)vanderbilt.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> OK, now that I've had a chance to look at the RDF, it is as I suspected.
If
>> I am understanding the proposal correctly, the proposal is to replace the
>> term <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat> (i.e. dwc:habitat) with the
term
>> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036> (which I'll call
>> envo:00002036 for brevity) However, the definition of dwc:habitat which
you
>> can view at
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwcterms.rdf
>> says
>>
>> dwc:habitat rdf:type rdfs:Property
>>
>> whereas the document I received at the end of those four redirects tells
me
>> that
>>
>> envo:00002036 rdf:type owl:Class
>>
>> Since
>>
>> owl:Class rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:Class
>>
>> then we are effectively changing the current DwC "habitat" term from a
>> property into a class similar to dwc:Occurrence, dwc:Identification,
>> dwc:Taxon, etc. which are all of type rdfs:Class.
>>
>> So I'm left wondering what I can do with the new term. With the old term
I
>> could make a statement like
>>
>> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> dwc:habitat
"deciduous
>> forest"
>>
>> or something like that if I take the hint from the DwC class groupings
that
>> dwc:habitat might be a property of dwc:Event instances. But I can't
>> meaningfully say
>>
>> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> envo:00002036
>> "deciduous forest"
>>
>> That doesn't make any sense because the way I understand RDF, predicates
>> should be properties, not classes. Even if we weren't talking about RDF,
>> I'd still have the same problem (we are changing a property into a class)
-
>> it's just easier for me to make plain what the issue is by giving RDF
>> examples. So just exactly what can I "do" with envo:00002036 ?????
>>
>> I haven't looked up the RDF for the other proposed terms (too much work
with
>> the four redirects), but I suspect if I did, I'd find that they are also
>> classes and not properties. This particular issue is a case of a broader
>> issue that I have about OBO-style ontologies. They are great for
defining
>> how many, many kinds of classes are related to each other. But they
provide
>> very few properties that could be used as predicates to serve as
properties
>> of instance data.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> John Wieczorek wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on the new environmental terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would change the term habitat to align it with the
>> ENVO habitat term. The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker
>> is https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=178. The
>> Darwin Core term habitat would be redefined as follows:
>>
>> Term Name: habitat
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Habitat
>> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
>> sustain an organism or a community of organisms.
>> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
>> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms for biome,
>> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>>
>> Term Name: biome
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Biome
>> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
>> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
>> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
>> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
>> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
>> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
>> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
>> ecological succession and climax vegetation.
>> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: environmental feature
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Environmental Feature
>> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
>> characteristic of a biome.
>> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: environmental material
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Environmental Material
>> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live.
>> Comment: Examples: "scum",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=189
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=190
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=191
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these terms,
>> or comments about their definitions, please respond to this message.
>> If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on any
>> amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
>> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>>
>> postal mail address:
>> PMB 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) 322-4942
>> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
>> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
>> Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
>>
>> postal mail address:
>> PMB 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) 322-4942
>> If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
>> http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:48:16 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdrmyEAwZ-TcTxUqcdGemwc330_H51XUTo9abb0Mez8-g(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance, abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could
not share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To
understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make these
> terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out of records
> that can be compared with one another where sampling methods allow such
> comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for Abundance don't make
> this possible. Forcing normalisation into percentages seems an
unnecessary
> hurdle and risks encouraging the impression that number of ducks on a
> reservoir is somehow comparable with percentage dry mass, proportional
> expression of CO1 for a particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or
> whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field which
the
> data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is the most
> appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the sample. That
gives
> consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is in %
> of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l, ind./m^2,
ind/m^3,
> ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in the
> report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed during
>> the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 16:01:10 +0200
From: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: <tuco(a)berkeley.edu>
Cc: 'TDWG Content Mailing List' <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID: <01fd01cebac0$da9a8550$8fcf8ff0$(a)gbif.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks, John.
You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
Simple Darwin Core.
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: gtuco.btuco(a)gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com] On Behalf Of John
Wieczorek
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc: aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of abundance,
abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the concepts
can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and
handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> the report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:37:15 -0600
From: Robert Guralnick <Robert.Guralnick(a)colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CADAgxGX=ZRknz2T-kd0e9wwwP72pSrtoeRVb175fm1EQQ7iovQ(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to be
honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
make sense given the class definition "The category of information
pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in a
dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and its
associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come from
a sample and a definition of extent.
It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
class within the Darwin Core?
Best, Rob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
<dhobern(a)gbif.org>wrote:
> Thanks, John.
>
> You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
> property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
> Simple Darwin Core.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gtuco.btuco(a)gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> John
> Wieczorek
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> Cc: aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance,
> abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
>
> If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts
> can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
> following properties?
>
> measurementType
> measurementValue
> measurementAccuracy
> measurementUnit
> measurementDeterminedDate
> measurementDeterminedBy
> measurementMethod
> measurementRemarks
>
> The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
> share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why,
> see
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern(a)gbif.org>
> wrote:
> > Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> > these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> > of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> > methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> > Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> > percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> > impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> > with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> > particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
> >
> > I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> > which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> > the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> > sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret
and
> handle it.
> >
> > Donald
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern(a)gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> > Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> > Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> > Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tdwg-content-bounces(a)lists.tdwg.org
> > [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> > Wever
> > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> > To: tuco(a)berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> > abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> > proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
> >
> > Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> > * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> > * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> > in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> > ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
> specific for %)?
> >
> > Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> > the report?
> >
> > Thanks for considering this question.
> >
> > With best regards,
> > Aaike
> >
> > John Wieczorek wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> >> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> >> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> >> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> >> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
> >> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
> >>
> >> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
> >>
> >> Term Name: abundance
> >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
> >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >> Label: Abundance
> >> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
> >> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
> >> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
> >> can be used.
> >> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
> >> "24%". For discussion see
> >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >> Refines:
> >> Status: proposed
> >> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
> >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >> Has Domain:
> >> Has Range:
> >> Refines:
> >> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
> >> Replaces:
> >> IsReplaceBy:
> >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>
> >> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
> >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
> >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >> Label: Abundance as Percent
> >> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
> >> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
> >> sample.
> >> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
> >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >> Refines:
> >> Status: proposed
> >> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
> >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >> Has Domain:
> >> Has Range:
> >> Refines:
> >> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
> >> Replaces:
> >> IsReplaceBy:
> >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>
> >> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
> >> and
> >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
> >>
> >> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
> >> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
> >> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
> >> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> >> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> >> the public commentary period.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tdwg-content mailing list
> >> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> >> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> > --
> > Aaike De Wever
> > BioFresh Science Officer
> > Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> > Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> > tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> > mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> > email: <aaike.dewever(a)naturalsciences.be>
> > skype: aaikew
> > LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> > BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> > <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> > Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content(a)lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
1
0
21 Aug '13
*Semantics for Biodiversity Symposium -- Call for Abstracts
*http://semantics4biodiversity.nceas.ucsb.edu
at TDWG Conference 2013
October 28 - November 1, 2013 - Florence, Italy.
*Symposium Description and Scope
*
This Symposium includes a series of three, 90 minute sessions at TDWG that
together constitute a "Semantics for Biodiversity" track, focused on --
Ontologies and formal models
Technologies, Reasoning and Annotation methods
Interoperability with genomic and ecological semantics
These sessions are not parallel tracked and they are placed on separate
days to avoid saturation on the topic. Additionally, there will be an
initial "primer/tutorial" session of 60 minutes, to provide basic
background for TDWG participants about semantic technologies, and how these
can help inform biodiversity research.
The conveners of this Symposium will be soliciting participation from
diverse communities, including those from the biodiversity informatics and
standards-development community per se, but also researchers interested in
knowledge modeling and semantic application development in the biodiversity
sciences, including relevant linkages to investigations in the ecological,
genomic and phylogenetic sciences. *These thematic areas recommend a
stronger-than-usual outreach to the computer science community, as
researchers in that community will be particularly attracted by the
prospects of reporting their work in a planned (and approved) special issue
of the Semantic Web Journal on "Semantics for Biodiversity"*. Multiple
groups of informaticians and technologists are currently developing
semantic technologies to enhance discovery, interpretation, and
interoperability of biodiversity data, so the upcoming meeting will provide
a signal opportunity to present and discuss these activities in a
coordinated fashion before perhaps the most relevant community who can
inform, critique, and contribute to these efforts. Further, it's
anticipated that these sessions will significantly raise awareness among
computer scientists and engineers relative to the informatics challenges
confronting the biodiversity community, particularly among those developing
generalized knowledge representation and reasoning technologies, and
machine-learning approaches.
*Important Dates
*
Submission due: September 4, 2013
Acceptance Notification: September 11, 2013
Symposium dates: October 29 - November 1, 2013
*Symposium Format and Submissions*
We invite abstract submissions (500 words maximum) for the three sessions,
which will be dedicated to short presentations on the topics described in
abstracts. We anticipate presentations will be for 20 minutes, with the
possibility that these times will change depending on the number of quality
submissions.
Please visit http://semantics4biodiversity.nceas.ucsb.edu for additional
information on each of the sessions. Questions for the organizers can be
directed to semantics4biodiversity(a)nceas.ucsb.edu
Submission site: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=s4bdtdwg2013
_______________________________________________
Semantics4biodiversity mailing list
Semantics4biodiversity(a)nceas.ucsb.edu
http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/mailman/listinfo/semantics4biodiversity
1
0
09 Aug '13
**
Hi Everyone,
The Georeferencing Working Group at iDigBio is pleased to announce our
first "Train-the-Trainers" Georeferencing Workshop for Thematic
Collections Networks (TCNs) and others in engaged in the digitization of
biological collections in the United States. See:
https://www.idigbio.org/content/idigbios-first-train-trainers-georeferencin…
for details. Three slots are still available in this workshop that is
designed to focus on training participants to teach others to
georeference. If you are interested, please send an application
describing the reason(s) for your interest in the workshop, the current
and future projects that will benefit from your attendance, and any
previous experience you have with georeferencing to iDigBio's Program
Assistant, Cathy Bester, cbester(a)flmnh.ufl.edu
What: Train-the-Trainers -- Georeferencing Workshop
Where: University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Who: Interested members of current TCNs and others in the biodiversity
natural history collections community.
When: October 8-12, 2012
Contact: Deborah Paul dpaul(a)fsu.edu for further information.
Best, Deb and the iDigBio Georeferencing Working Group
Deborah Paul
User Services, iDigBio
Institute for Digital Information, iDigInfo
Florida State University
Tallahassee, Florida 32308
850-644-6366
2
2
Hi folks,
Just starting to get into Darwin Core. Thanks for any help and suggestions
you can provide.
I'm the builder of a data capture application (using PDAs and smart phones)
called CyberTracker (http://www.cybertracker.org). We want to create a
feature to export to Simple Darwin Core as XML.
We have two kinds of data: timer tracks and sightings. Timer tracks are
automatically snapped at regular intervals and only contain a timestamp and
location. Sightings are manually captured data and vary quite a bit. For
example, they could represent the weather or a direct sighting of an animal.
It seems clear that a sighting maps directly to an "Event".
If we have a long list of timer track points, should these show up as many
"Location" records?
Regards,
-Justin
4
6
-- Apologies for cross-posting --
Dear colleagues,
We are happy to announce that we have just launched our blog athttp://lifewatch.inbo.be/blog/
We will be blogging about the ideas, challenges and technologies involved in building an open terrestrial and freshwater observatory in Flanders for the LifeWatch research infrastructure. By openly documenting what we do, we hope to turn our efforts into open and collaborative projects. You can read more athttp://lifewatch.inbo.be/blog/posts/introduction.html
You can follow us on Twitter (https://twitter.com/LifeWatchINBO) or subscribe to the RSS feed (http://lifewatch.inbo.be/blog/feeds/rss.xml).
Looking forward to collaborate,
The LifeWatch INBO team:
Peter Desmet
Bart Aelterman
Kevin Azijn
* * * * * * * * * * * * * D I S C L A I M E R * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Dit bericht en eventuele bijlagen geven enkel de visie van de schrijver weer en binden het INBO onder geen enkel beding, zolang dit bericht niet bevestigd is door een geldig ondertekend document.
The views expressed in this message and any annex are purely those of the writer and may not be regarded as stating an official position of INBO, as long as the message is not confirmed by a duly signed document.
1
0