Hello,
I appreciate all of the thoughtful comments regarding the question of what
is an observation. My rational for starting at an observation and not a
monitoring event or some higher level was to make sure that we had a clear
definition of the primary unit of observational data. It is this unit that
can be (and is) integrated with existing natural history collections
information, and is the main determinant of why observational data should
be included with current initiatives. Walter Berendsohn's, Hannu
Saarenmaa's, and the OGC Observations and Measurements white paper give us
a good starting point. From these I suggest the following:
Definition of Observation: An observation is a collection event that
describes a phenomenon, and is bound to the spatiotemporal location where
it was made. Furthermore, an observation describes an occurrence and can be
linked to descriptions of other occurrences.
Once this definition is established, and agreed upon, then this subgroup
can assert what is unique about observational data. This pertains to the
second aspect of Hannu's suggestion, what Jerry Cooper refers to as the
latter or continuum option, and what Denis Lepage discusses in detail.
Specifically, we can now discuss the fundamental organization unit of
observational data: the collection event. In the description of the
collection event we begin to address issues of data quality, protocols,
extent, precision, accuracy, certainty, protocol methodology, negative or
absence data, and other issues.
Regards,
Steve Kelling
Cornell Lab of Ornithology
607-254-2478 (work)
607-342-1029 (cell)
