No, not too negative, its good to get some feedback.
The server is not .NET based yet - I am still working on the .NET implementation of the LSID framework at present - making good progress though.
Kevin
r.page@BIO.GLA.AC.UK 04/23/06 10:52 PM >>>
Hope it didn't come across as too negative. I know these things are not easy to get set up, and I'm still finding my own way through the RDF jungle.
Is your server .NET based?
Regards
Rod
On 22 Apr 2006, at 10:57, Kevin Richards wrote:
Thanks for those comments Rod. As you have seen this is an initial attempt.
The syntax
<TaxonNames:hasBasionym> <rdf:Descriptionrdf:about="urn:lsid:indexfungorum.org:Names:148860" /> </TaxonNames:hasBasionym>
strikes me as odd.
This is due to an accidental omission of the RDF entity type of the basionym object. Will fix this.
I also suggest that urn:lsid:indexfungorum.org:Names:148860 has a complementary tag such as
<TaxonNames:isBasionymOf rdf:resource ="urn:lsid:indexfungorum.org:Names: 213649" />
Godd idea. The fields are based on the initial implementation of TCS-RDF that Roger completed, and as he said, it is not a complete schema at this stage. BTW the reverse RDF pointers can be viewed
using
launchpad by going into the launchpad settings and turning on 'Show back links'.
The attribute TaxonNames:nomenclaturalCode="http://tdwg.org/2006/03/12/TaxonNames/ NomenclaturalCode/#botanical" of the tag TaxonNames:TaxonName is problematic. Firstly, I don't know why this is an attribute rather
than
just another tag,
Due to my lack of understanding of RDF and when to use attributes as opposed to tags - I was blindly following an example.
and the URI http://tdwg.org/2006/03/12/TaxonNames/NomenclaturalCode/#botanical returns a 404. If this is just a made up URI then this is bad --
EVERY
URI in an RDF document must be real -- unlike XML schema where any
old
rubbish can be used.
Also due to the prototyping stage of this 'project'. Will be fixed by online TDWG ontologies at some stage I assume?
<TaxonNames:publishedIn><i>Syll. fung.</i> (Abellini)<b>1</b>: 148 (1882) (1882)</TaxonNames:publishedIn> has formatting information (the <i></i> and <b></b> tags). I think
this
is in principle a bad thing(TM)
We debated this a little and decided to leave the field text the same as has been returned by other services of IndexFungorum. But you have a good point and it is something we will need to discuss further in future.
Kevin
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++ WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or privileged. They are intended for the addressee only and are not to be read, used, copied or disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email and delete this message and any attachments.
The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not necessarily reflect the official views of Landcare Research.
Landcare Research http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------- 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 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
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or privileged. They are intended for the addressee only and are not to be read, used, copied or disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email and delete this message and any attachments.
The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not necessarily reflect the official views of Landcare Research.
Landcare Research http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++