_______________________________________________Perfect! Thank you so much John! I will go as you advised! Have a great week!Get Outlook for iOS
From: tdwg-humboldt <tdwg-humboldt-bounces@lists.tdwg.org> on behalf of John Wieczorek <tuco@berkeley.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 4:04:22 AM
To: Humboldt Core TG <tdwg-humboldt@lists.tdwg.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-humboldt] Should I add "identifiedBy" for absence data?To me it makes sense to do so. I think of it as, "Who said so with respect to identifications."
On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 5:54 PM Yi Ming Gan <ymgan@naturalsciences.be> wrote:
Hello,_______________________________________________
Maybe a silly question - should I add “identifiedBy” to absence data?
The scientists specifically look for a species in the catch from the trawl and found none of them, so there are occurrence records with such species with occurrenceStatus == “absent”.
If I have an event which only has absence data in occurrence extension, does it make sense to add “identifiedBy” for Humboldt Extension as well as those absence records in occurrence extension?
Thank you so much for your help!!
CheersMing
tdwg-humboldt mailing list
tdwg-humboldt@lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-humboldt
tdwg-humboldt mailing list
tdwg-humboldt@lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-humboldt