Can you explain the difference between your new term dwc:subtype and the term dwc:basisOfRecord most recently proposed in this thread?
JOHN R. WIECZOREK wrote (24 Oct 2009 11:29AM):
"basisOfRecord will be used in Darwin Core as it is now, without a formal type vocabulary. The recommended controlled vocabulary will continue to be managed outside of the standard as supplementary documentation, as was ratified already. The current recommendations are given at http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/RecordLevelTerms#basisOfRecord. The values on this list can be used or not, changed or not, or added to without affecting the Darwin Core standard. When I mentioned "some of the terms would go to dcterms:type" in my net solution, above, I was thinking that it would be redundant to keep "StillImage", "MovingImage", and "Sound" on the list of controlled vocabulary for basisOfRecord, as they are already in dcterms:type. Communities would be free to add to the vocabulary to the level of specificity they require. For example, MRTG could dispense with the mrtg:subtype term and use dwc:basisOfRecord instead - adding "Photograph", for example, to the controlled vocabulary list. This is exactly the sort of thing basisOfRecord was always meant for."
I see no difference bewteen your dwc:subtype and the proposed dwc:basisOfRecord except the name. The term basisOfRecord has been used for this purpose in Darwin Core since 13 Jun 2003. I think precedence should prevail.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Gregor Hagedorn g.m.hagedorn@gmail.com wrote:
With respect to the discussion of subclasses: the new recordType is on a different level than the resource types. We should not mix the information that something can be usefully interpreted as a Occurrence or Taxon concept with the type of resource that vouchers for this information.
Thus, while I think recordType is a DarwinCore categorization of intent, not resource, and is fine, I still feel that the basisOfRecord vocabulary is a subtyping of resource types.
I therefore believe that it would make life simpler for many consumers of DwC if DwC would adopt DublinCore type for its own purposes. Instead of having basisOfRecord = PreservedSpecimen FossilSpecimen LivingSpecimen HumanObservation MachineObservation StillImage MovingImage Sound NomenclaturalChecklist
DarwinCore would first use the DublinCore vocabulary: dcterms:type= StillImage MovingImage Sound Event Text
and then use dwc:subtype= PreservedSpecimen FossilSpecimen LivingSpecimen HumanObservation MachineObservation NomenclaturalChecklist
for those subtypes of dcterms:type that DarwinCore cares about to specify further. This would allow consumers to directly map DwC records into their DublinCore metadata, rather than analysing the implied hierarchy and mapping in the flattened basisOfRecord.
Gregor