Hi all,

In my attempt to use Humboldt Extension to infer non-detection, I arrived at this question because it is not clear to me how to use null in the following situation.

Should eco:isTaxonomicScopeFullyReported (previously eco:isTaxonomicScopeComplete) be "true", "false" or null if an dwc:Event do not catch anything within the eco:targetTaxonomicScope and eco:isAbsenceReported == "false"?

I illustrate my understanding in the table below:

assume that all the catch are reported in the Occurrence extension

eventID	catch	eventRemarks	targetTaxonomicScope (taxa are pipe-separated)	isAbsenceReported	isTaxonomicScopeFullyReported	can infer non-detection of taxa within targetTaxonomicScope?
event_001	A		A \| B	false	true	true
event_002	A		A \| B	false	false	false
event_003	A, C		A \| B	false	true	true
event_004		by-catch only	A \| B	false	true	true
event_005		by-catch only	A \| B	false	false	false
event_006		by-catch only	A \| B	false		false
event_007		caught nothing	A \| B	false	true	true
event_008		caught nothing	A \| B	false	false	false
event_009		caught nothing	A \| B	false		false

How can I distinguish:

an dwc:Event caught by-catch only, but did not report it (no dwc:Occurrence record associates with the dwc:Event)
an dwc:Event caught nothing at all

Is this distinction important? Can someone with ecology or relevant background please comment? @Rob Stevenson maybe?

Thanks a lot!

Cheers

Ming