Minutes of the Subgroup "Structure of descriptive data" workshop at TDWG 1999 in Harvard
----------------------
The subgroup convened on Sunday, 31.10.99 during the annual TDWG meeting at Harvard University. The following topics were discussed:
1. Diederich's "Basic properties"
General agreement was reached that a direct application of the "structure-property-value" model would be too restrictive, applicable mainly to morphological descriptions. A more general model, including cultural/physiological and molecular descriptions should be developed. The term "feature" was proposed as a more general replacement for structure.
2. Standardization of schemas (character definitons), user defined metadata
This was considered desirable in the long run, but, esp.considering the experiences made by Richard Pankhurst with plant descriptors, it should be considered a long term goal. The problems were shortly discussed. Agreement was reached that these topics are quite separate and should be discussed in separate discussion groups.
3. New interchange format for descriptors
It was proposed that a new "Superset format", encompassing the functionality of the existing DELTA and NEXUS interchange formats, and with extensions to support the requirements of LucID, DeltaAccess, and possible further software packages should be developed. However, it was agreed that we should first step back to review the current use of descriptors. The new format should not be a simple superset with possible redundancy, but the principles of biological descriptions should be reevaluated to cover them with appropriate and general mechanisms. To achieve a clearer picture, a requirement analysis was proposed (see next point).
A distinction was made between the data model and the metaformat. It was agreed that XML may be a good vehicle for a new standard. However, alternatives should be carefully evaluated. A decision for or against XML would have to be made only after the requirement analysis and information model had sufficiently far progressed. An important point was made that the standard should belong to TDWG, and should neither in name nor in the preparation of future versions be too intimately tied to any developer of a software application. The relationship to existing standards TDWG-DELTA or NEXUS should be clearly defined and mapping definitions provided.
4. Requirement analysis
A requirement analysis is to be made, separately for general and application type specific requirements. The general requirements should be discussed according to a preliminary information model.
5. How to proceed
The group agreed to communicate over an email listserver (which will be installed at the University of Kansas with the help of Jim Beach). It was agreed that the documents to be discussed should in simple cases be send directly as plain text in the body of an email, or in the case of longer, structured and formatted documents, in the form of HTML attachments. The use of PDF should be avoided, since it can not be directly read and is difficult to annotate and consolidate annotations.
A web page will document the consolidated discussion papers and the emendations or criticisms regarding these papers. In addition, the list server will directly provide an unedited archive of the original discussion.
Time frame: It was considered desirable to have a definite proposal by a years time.
---------------- Any additions or corrections from those present are welcome!
Gregor ---------------------------------------------------------- Inst. for Plant Virology, Microbiology, and Biosafety Federal Research Center for Agriculture and Forestry (BBA) Gregor Hagedorn Net: G.Hagedorn@bba.de Koenigin-Luise-Str. 19 Tel: +49-30-8304-2220 14195 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49-30-8304-2203
Often wrong but never in doubt!