"a (meta-) population is a LifeInstance" does seem to make sense to me.
"a (meta-) population is a taxon" does not make sense to me. Nor does "a (meta-) population is an Organism"
But "a (meta-) population is a TaxonInstance" sort of makes sense, but Rich dislikes the inherent ambiguity that occurs when using the string "taxon" or "taxa" in a case like this because it opens the can of worms about names and concepts and spins off into endless related, but disassociated, debates. The word "taxon" has several meanings that can only be understood by a clear context within which the word is used or by an accompanying long definition that spells out which meaning is being used. Rich has written on this multiple times.
Chuck
-----Original Message----- From: tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Gregor Hagedorn Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 12:18 PM To: Nico Cellinese Cc: tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] New terms need resolution: "Individual"
((who would not forgive you?))
but you think "Organism" includes "population" and metapopulation? We are defining is-a relationships here (subclassing was already discussed), so "a (meta-) population is an organism" should make sense. It does not to me.
Gregor _______________________________________________ tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content