Was anything done at tdwg about aligning the various overlapping ontologies? Ie lsid vocabs and dwc.
Sent from my HTC
----- Reply message ----- From: "Roger Hyam" rogerhyam@mac.com Date: Mon, Dec 21, 2009 10:07 PM Subject: [tdwg-content] [tdwg-tag] taxonomic rank terms To: "Kevin Richards" RichardsK@landcareresearch.co.nz Cc: "Peter Midford" peter.midford@gmail.com, "tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org mailing list" tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org, "tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org" tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org
Peter/Kevin,
Sorry for delayed reply.
The warning note on the top of the TDWG ontology really does mean what it says.
I have just been working through TaxonConcept, TaxonName and TaxonRank. Although I hope to change the files are arranged this won't effect the URIs or their meaning - especially the ranks.
The only area in the taxon name/concept vocabularies where I would like to use the hatchet is in the taxon Relationship. I believe this is superfluous and just plain confusing. Instead of being able to simply say SpeciesA includes SpeciesB we have to say SpeciesA has a Relationship and the relationship has a target taxon of SpeciesB and is of type includes! Here I'd like to cut things down to simple properties of TaxonConcept.
I will write a fuller explanation of any proposed changes when I have finished so that we can fully discuss it. I'll do this on the tdwg-content list and we can spin it out into issues in a tracker of some kind.
All the best,
Roger
N.B. I am only looking at the bit that concerns me at the moment i.e. Taxon stuff not all the occurrence stuff.
On 20 Dec 2009, at 19:21, Kevin Richards wrote:
Yes, I am also curious what the state of the various schemas and vocabs is after the recent TDWG meeting. I have previously expressed what I considered a priority, to review the various overlapping standards, and then re-model, refine, align/map equivalences, etc, to clarify the situation.
This was something that was said may happen during/around the TDWG meeting. Has this been achieved/started?
Kevin
-----Original Message----- From: tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Peter Midford Sent: Friday, 18 December 2009 5:01 p.m. To: tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org Cc: roger@hyam.net Subject: [tdwg-tag] taxonomic rank terms
Hi Roger and others, I know that the tdwg ontology effort is currently in a state of flux, but I have a specific question that perhaps someone can answer here. What is or will be the fate of the vocabulary of rank terms at http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/TaxonRank? The disclaimer at the top of the page includes that the http URIs of 'key concepts' will be maintained, but are these rank terms going to be preserved? If so, will their URI's remain stable? Are there plans to prune any out?
Thanks,
Peter Midford
tdwg-tag mailing list tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
Please consider the environment before printing this email Warning: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you receive it in error: (i) you must not read, use, disclose, copy or retain it; (ii) please contact the sender immediately by reply email and then delete the emails. The views expressed in this email may not be those of Landcare Research New Zealand Limited. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz _______________________________________________ tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
________________________________ Please consider the environment before printing this email Warning: This electronic message together with any attachments is confidential. If you receive it in error: (i) you must not read, use, disclose, copy or retain it; (ii) please contact the sender immediately by reply email and then delete the emails. The views expressed in this email may not be those of Landcare Research New Zealand Limited. http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz