One thing that wasn't included in what I sent Yani (because it wasn't done) is a draft "test suite". That's probably deceptively named, but it's basically the information we want to collect from test implementers of the Views controlled
vocabularies. Here's what I have so far:
https://github.com/tdwg/ac/blob/master/views/test-suite.md
I plan to turn it into a Google Form that implementers can fill out when they are done. Essentially, it is to determine which "features" of the controlled vocabularies they actually wanted or were able to use in their tests. The goal would
be to use the input from the forms to generate a table something like the "Vocabulary Usage" section of https://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20090315/implementation.html
which would allow one to see at a glance which of the features of the controlled vocabularies people were actually successful at implementing.
In theory, any unimplementable features would be dropped from the vocabulary. I think this may have been the case for "member" and "memberList" which I don't think were included in the final SKOS specification. Of course, they had a large
number of implementers and my task group probably won't. So there may be some features that will eventually used by developers that wouldn't necessarily be used if people tested it "by hand".
Anyway, at the HC meetings, we have frequently said stuff like "people will need/want to do X". So in the case of HC, we'd make a list of all of the "X's" and then ask test implementers to say whether they actually were able to do X with
the vocabulary or not. As painful as it may be, we probably need to get rid of X if nobody can make it work, even if it's something we love in theory.
Steve
--
Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D. he/him/his
Data Science and Data Curation Specialist / Librarian III
Jean & Alexander Heard Libraries, Vanderbilt University
Nashville, TN 37235, USA
Office: Eskind Biomedical Library, EMB 111
Phone: (615) 343-4582
https://my.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/
From:
tdwg-humboldt <tdwg-humboldt-bounces@lists.tdwg.org> on behalf of Yanina Sica <yanina.sica@yale.edu>
Date: Friday, November 12, 2021 at 12:23 PM
To: John Wieczorek <tuco@berkeley.edu>, Humboldt Core TG <tdwg-humboldt@lists.tdwg.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-humboldt] Humboldt Task Group Meeting schedule and plans!
Hey John and all!
Yes, since we are getting so close to finishing the full revision of terms. It might be a good time to update the IPT with the new HC terms to start testing. Not sure how straightforward that is but we wanted to start discussing it.
Also, Steve shared quite a lot of information regarding the following steps in the TDWG ratification process. Thanks for that Steve! I started a document
here with that info.
Cheers,
Yanina V. Sica, PhD
Data Manager | Map of Life
Yale University
pronouns: she/her/hers
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 12:45 PM John Wieczorek <tuco@berkeley.edu> wrote: