Hello,

I appreciate all of the thoughtful comments regarding the question of what is an observation. My rational for starting at an observation and not a monitoring event or some higher level was to make sure that we had a clear definition of the primary unit of observational data. It is this unit that can be (and is) integrated with existing natural history collections information, and is the main determinant of why observational data should be included with current initiatives. Walter Berendsohn's, Hannu Saarenmaa's, and the OGC Observations and Measurements white paper give us a good starting point. From these I suggest the following:

Definition of Observation: An observation is a collection event that describes a phenomenon, and is bound to the spatiotemporal location where it was made. Furthermore, an observation describes an occurrence and can be linked to descriptions of other occurrences.

Once this definition is established, and agreed upon, then this subgroup can assert what is unique about observational data. This pertains to the second aspect of Hannu's suggestion, what Jerry Cooper refers to as the latter or continuum option, and what Denis Lepage discusses in detail. Specifically, we can now discuss the fundamental organization unit of observational data: the collection event. In the description of the collection event we begin to address issues of data quality, protocols, extent, precision, accuracy, certainty, protocol methodology, negative or absence data, and other issues.

Regards,

Steve Kelling Cornell Lab of Ornithology 607-254-2478 (work) 607-342-1029 (cell)