For clarification, each example shows one string value that is free text and another that is an ENVO IRI. Does this mean that if a user wants to indicate the ENVO class for flooded grassland biome that they can chose to provide either the text label for the class or the IRI? Or is the example showing free text intended to show how a user might provide a value if they aren't following the recommended best practice (i.e. using some system other than ENVO that doesn't have IRIs)? It seems to me counterproductive to provide two choices. I would rather see the recommendation be to provide an IRI unless one isn't available. Otherwise, consumers will be stuck with having to try to interpret what free text means.
Alternatively, provide two terms: one intended for use with literal names (i.e. free text) and one intended for use with IRIs. That precedent has been set in Audubon Core (e.g. ac:provider and ac:providerLiteral). In DwC we have the dwc: and dwciri: solution in the RDF guide (which appears once again to be stuck in Executive Committee limbo). In the Audubon Core case, this isn't really an RDF issue since AC doesn't assume any particular representation and I think you could have a spreadsheet with an IRI value for ac:provider. I suppose it would be kosher to have dwciri:biome expressed as an IRI in string form in a spreadsheet for people who don't care about RDF. I don't think this has actually been discussed.
Steve
John Wieczorek wrote:
Term Name: biome Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ Label: Biome Definition: An environmental system to which resident ecological communities have evolved adaptations. Comment: Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO). Examples: "flooded grassland biome", "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property Refines: Status: proposed Date Issued: 2013-09-26 Date Modified: 2015-03-26 Has Domain: Has Range: Refines: Version: biome-2015-03-26 Replaces: IsReplaceBy: Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD
Term Name: environmentalFeature Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ Label: Environmental Feature Definition: A material entity which determines an environmental system. Comment: Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO). Examples: "meadow", "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property Refines: Status: proposed Date Issued: 2013-09-26 Date Modified: 2015-03-26 Has Domain: Has Range: Refines: Version: environmentalFeature-2015-03-26 Replaces: IsReplaceBy: Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD
Term Name: environmentalMaterial Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ Label: Environmental Material Definition: A portion of environmental material is a fiat object which forms the medium or part of the medium of an environmental system. Comment: Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO). Examples: "scum", "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property Refines: Status: proposed Date Issued: 2013-09-26 Date Modified: 2015-03-26 Has Domain: Has Range: Refines: Version: environmentalMaterial-2015-03-26 Replaces: IsReplaceBy: Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD