The only difference between the first list (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/type-vocabulary/index.htm) and the third list (http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/DwCTypeVocabulary) is the Event term. Actually I believe that the Event term shouldn't be on the first list, because it is a Dublin Core term and already a controlled vocabulary term for dcterms:type. I think you should go under that assumption. In any case, I doubt that people will want to share biodiversity records that are Events that are not one of the subtypes of Events on the third list. I updated the Google Code wiki page to be more explicit that the Event and PhysicalObject terms come from Dublin Core.

There has been some discussion on the tdwg-content list about other possible basisOfRecord vocabulary to try to better distinguish digital media. The original argument for this is captured in an Issue on the Darwin Core Google Code site at http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=68. This is a good example of how the type vocabulary might be expanded to cover new cases.

I don't know what to tell you about the GBIF vocabulary except that it was devised in April of last year before the type vocabularies for Darwin Core reached their current state of maturity.

As this discussion may be useful to others, I'd like to request that you post it to tdwg-content as well, or give me permission to do so.

Hope that helps,

John

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Francisco Pando <pando@gbif.es> wrote: