How many XML schemas are currently in work within TDWG(Collections, SDD, Economic Botany, Geography, Spatial Data) and GBIF(DADI, ECAT, and DIGIT)?  Is there a way to unify them under some more universal schemaML naming approach?  This seems like a unique moment in time to start a precedent. 

The GBIF Biodiversity Data Architecture document is replete with models of interfaces and web services that will all require new XML schemas to be created--each needing a name. GBIF also intends to add schemas for taxa, literature, gazeteers, indexes, providers, etc. 

Is there a way to be more universal in naming these schemas?

The simple names like BioML, TaxML, etc. have already been used and are probably too general anyway. (OmniML?)

One approach could be to concatentate dipthongs or something to create a schema of ML names.  For example, BioDescML, BioTaxML, BioLitML.  Or BioDML, BioTML, BioLML.  Or GBIFDescML.  Or TDWGDescML. 

Chuck Miller  

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Croft [mailto:jrc@ANBG.GOV.AU]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 8:53 PM
To: TDWG-SDD@LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
Subject: Re: Name for the standard

is DescML taken?

jim

>jrc> So what is it to be?  BioML?
>
>preoccupied, although there in no strict registration mechanism except
>its flavour in namespace. http://xml.coverpages.org/bioml.html

~ Jim Croft ~ jrc@anbg.gov.au ~ 02-62465500 ~ www.anbg.gov.au/jrc/ ~