[tdwg-content] More Strange Monkey Business-like things in GBIF KOS Document

More Strange Monkey Business-like things in GBIF KOS Document.

Does this accurately characterize my project?

"in the GeoSpecies project104 based on a small purpose-built ontology105 of mosquito-borne human pathogens."

Did they bother to read any of the seven other examples on this page?

Or here http://www.taxonconcept.org/

or here http://www.delicious.com/kidehen/pivot_collection_app+linked_geo_species

or here http://www.slideshare.net/pjdwi/biodiversity-informatics-on-the-semantic-web

Also note that this particular link they used in the document 104 does not work

http://about.geospecies.org/index.htm

While this

http://about.geospecies.org/

or this does

http://about.geospecies.org/index.html

Also the "small" TaxonConcept SPARQL endpoint has ~27 million triples.

It might also be useful to explain how reasoning can be used on the larger data sets.

Do they have an example of reasoning that works on a data set over 100 million triples?

Is there some reason why there is so much "push" towards specialized near proprietary solutions like LSID's and LOD unfriendly vocabularies?

Respectfully,

- Pete