"Markus Döring (GBIF)" mdoering@gbif.org ha escrito:
[concensus discussion] ... Why make all software check for two alternatives when a consensus would fix the problem? (Consensus... did I say that word in a tdwg-content email????)
Ummm, because plenty of data will not meet the consensus? Because robust software checks for things that may occur even if they violate expectations, rules, standards, recommendations, conventions, or consensus?
Nevertheless its worthwhile trying to converge towards a standard vocabulary. So we definitely should recommend a best practice that more and more people can follow over time!
At GBIF we recommend the english values, but if there is a consensus to change that to latin I think we dont mind: http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/rank.xml
Markus
In time and from scratch... yes, converging simplifies things in Taxspeak. Smaller dictionary: doubleplusgood.
But existing, real life data is stubbornly diverse. Non-Oceanians would probably favour robust (i.e. multiple) approaches for a while.
Arturo
tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
---------------------------------------------------------------- Este mensaje ha sido enviado desde https://webmail.unav.es