I found an Excel spreadsheet containing "the MIGS/MIMS checklist" at http://gensc.org/gc_wiki/index.php/MIGS/MIMS#The_MIGS.2FMIMS_checklist_as_a_... It mentions "sample" in the description of various terms, but I couldn't find "sample" as a term itself. But there may be something I'm missing or maybe I haven't actually found the "real" term definitions (i.e. the normative document).
I didn't see any reference to term definitions as URIs or with RDF descriptions (as in DCMI and DwC). Just cells in a spreadsheet. Steve
John Wieczorek wrote:
Funny thing for all of you Darwin Core trivia buffs. In one iteration of the class that became Occurrence, it was called "Sample" (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/history/index.htm#Sample-2008-11-19). It was rejected as being too biased toward collections and away from observations. With CollectionObjects, we no longer need to worry about that sensitive issue. So, to me it seems Sample is no worse than CollectionObject, but suffers the same shortcomings when it comes to types of evidence that people wouldn't think of as samples (drawings, digital media, written notes and literature).
But I applaud the proposal to reconcile with GSC's Sample. Are GSC terms defined as vocabularies in a way that is compatible with Dublin Core and Darwin Core? Can someone point to the normative document containing the authoritative definition of the term?
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Gregor Hagedorn g.m.hagedorn@gmail.com wrote:
I like sample. It is much more general and appropriate to work outside of museums. Preserving everthing is a luxury not all can afford. It should be done for many cases, but we usually don't have the resources to do it always.
Gregor
tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content