Rich
>> For practical reasons I think the starting point for assigning
>> GUIDs should be basically nomenclatural.
>I completely agree -- but again, what gets a "Name" GUID? (as opposed to a
>"usage" GUID or a "concept" GUID) Only basionyms? (I hope!) Or also
>different combinations? (I hope not!) Or also spelling variants? (I *really*
>hope not!!) There is also a problem of how to deal with autonyms
>(=nominotypical names in zoology). One GUID, or two? Logically, only one --
>but most people don't do it that way.
I am trying to understand how you imagine a name guid system will work. When you say "what gets a name guid?", what data/database do you think will get the guid - a central name repository? Are you thinking that all records in various databases around the world that are referring to the "same" name will have the same "Name Guid"? For resolvable GUIDs this will mean the name will always resolve to the central repository data.
Kevin