Nope. IF is a nomenclator and has no taxonomic opinions on the names included - except for those of the publishing author(s) (which I take as read) and an implied assignment to a parent family. Neither are we talking about replaced names in a nomenlatural sense - i.e. nomen nova and their replaced synonyms. We are both talking about names in the database which are for whatever reason not 'real' names in a nomenclatural sense - in that there is no evidence that they are associated with a 'normal' attempt to publish a nomenclatural novelty (this takes care of invalid names which strictly do not exist). For example, name which have crept in from a checklist which are herbarium names, or a sphalm (error) where a generic name is associated with a specific epithet from a related species name (e.g. Fagus papyrifera - a sphalm for either Betula papyrifera or an unknown species of Fagus). Under these circumstances IF currently provides a circular reference via an 'is ReplacedBy' - the other two types of 'isReplacedBy' currently in use in IF are deprecated records (duplicates - more common in IPNI as Sally indicates for historical reasons) and orthographic variants (there is only one correct form under the Code).
Hope this is clear - fire away if not ... ;-)
Cheers,
Paul
________________________________
From: Chuck Miller [mailto:Chuck.Miller@mobot.org] Sent: Mon 02/10/2006 16:12 To: S.Hinchcliffe@kew.org; Paul Kirk Cc: tdwg-guid@mailman.nhm.ku.edu Subject: RE: [Tdwg-guid] resolving deleted records [ Scanned for viruses ]
Sally and Paul, Sounds like you two are talking about different things:
Paul is describing a taxonomic issue of replaced names. Sally is describing a database cleanup issue for duplicate database records of "replaced" name records.
Is that right?
Chuck -----Original Message----- From: tdwg-guid-bounces@mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:tdwg-guid-bounces@mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Sally Hinchcliffe Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 9:51 AM To: Paul Kirk Cc: tdwg-guid@mailman.nhm.ku.edu Subject: Re: [Tdwg-guid] resolving deleted records [ Scanned for viruses ]
Hi Paul Are you saying that if an IF record has 'isReplacedBy' and the id is the same as the id asked for then the record is deleted ?
We can do this, but it seems a little arcane to me compared to an explicit 'deleted' tag
Sally
IF does has a circular isRepalcedBy for a small subset of names - e.g. those which have crept in from specimen labels, those where a generic names has been used (perhaps in print) with an epithet from a related genus.
Paul
-----Original Message----- From: tdwg-guid-bounces@mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:tdwg-guid-bounces@mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Sally Hinchcliffe Sent: 02 October 2006 15:30 To: Roderic Page Cc: tdwg-guid@mailman.nhm.ku.edu Subject: Re: [Tdwg-guid] resolving deleted records [ Scanned for
viruses
]
Yes but some aren't replaced by anything, i.e. if a record was simply entered in error
I could say isReplacedBy and then put a null ID in but that's a little subtle ...
Sally
Sally,
Do you need anything more than dc:isReplacedBy? The presence of this
in
itself says the record has been suppressed/replaced.
Regards
Rod
On 2 Oct 2006, at 15:12, Sally Hinchcliffe wrote:
Apologies for cross-posting but I'm trying to get a reasonably
quick
response ...
I'm trying to finalise the IPNI LSID server as far as I can. One
of
the issues that was raised at the GUIDs workshop was how to handle deleted records. In IPNI we suppress records where they have been duplicated. There are a high number of duplicates in IPNI and as
we
start identifying true duplicates and linking them, the number of suppressed or deprecated records will rise and the chances of
someone
having an id which resolves to a now suppressed record will become quite high
What I'd like to do if someone asks for a suppressed record is to return metadata which just indicates the record is suppressed (or deleted) plus if relevant a pointer to the preferred record
For the latter we can use dc:isReplacedBy which I think is what
IF
are using
For the former - I couldn't find any really obvious existing tag
in
use out there. What are other people using? Or do you have any suggestions or examples of deleted records?
Sally *** Sally Hinchcliffe *** Computer section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew *** tel: +44 (0)20 8332 5708 *** S.Hinchcliffe@rbgkew.org.uk
TDWG-GUID mailing list TDWG-GUID@mailman.nhm.ku.edu http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-guid
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Professor Roderic D. M. Page Editor, Systematic Biology DEEB, IBLS Graham Kerr Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QP United Kingdom
Phone: +44 141 330 4778 Fax: +44 141 330 2792 email: r.page@bio.gla.ac.uk web: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/rod.html iChat: aim://rodpage1962 reprints: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/pubs.html
Subscribe to Systematic Biology through the Society of Systematic Biologists Website: http://systematicbiology.org Search for taxon names:
http://darwin.zoology.gla.ac.uk/~rpage/portal/
Find out what we know about a species: http://ispecies.org Rod's rants on phyloinformatics: http://iphylo.blogspot.com Rod's rants on ants: http://semant.blogspot.com
*** Sally Hinchcliffe *** Computer section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew *** tel: +44 (0)20 8332 5708 *** S.Hinchcliffe@rbgkew.org.uk
TDWG-GUID mailing list TDWG-GUID@mailman.nhm.ku.edu http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-guid
*** Sally Hinchcliffe *** Computer section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew *** tel: +44 (0)20 8332 5708 *** S.Hinchcliffe@rbgkew.org.uk
_______________________________________________ TDWG-GUID mailing list TDWG-GUID@mailman.nhm.ku.edu http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-guid