Chuck,
I certainly hope that we can manage this,
and even more that we can make seamless connections between our registry
services and those for molecular and ecological communities. We need to think
big here…
Donald
---------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern (dhobern@gbif.org)
Programme Officer for Data Access and Database Interoperability
Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat
Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100
Tel: +45-35321483
---------------------------------------------------------------
From:
tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Chuck.Miller@mobot.org
Sent: 17 January 2006 19:00
To: m.doering@BGBM.org;
Chuck.Miller@mobot.org; tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
Cc: w.berendsohn@bgbm.org
Subject: Re: [tdwg-tapir] FAQ page
Hopefully
we can at least arrive in the future at a single GBIF UDDI for all data
exchange providers.
Chuck
-----Original
Message-----
From: "Döring, Markus" [mailto:m.doering@BGBM.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006
10:49 AM
To: Chuck.Miller@mobot.org;
tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
Cc: Berendsohn, Walter G.
Subject: AW: [tdwg-tapir] FAQ page
Chuck,
The original BioCASE uses its own
registry for service discovery, has its own kind of cache and discovers
availble data elements (concepts) through the biocase wrappers(=services)
themselves. This "capability" request does also exist in TAPIR. So a
service can technically describe itself to clients.
The
current work on BioCASE makes use of the GBIF UDDI, but adds some extra data to
it (mainly for statistics).
Markus
-----Ursprüngliche
Nachricht-----
Von: Chuck.Miller@mobot.org [mailto:Chuck.Miller@mobot.org]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Januar 2006
15:57
An: Döring, Markus;
Chuck.Miller@mobot.org; tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
Cc: Berendsohn, Walter G.
Betreff: RE: [tdwg-tapir] FAQ page
Thanks,
Markus.
That
helps add more to the ontology of data exchange. But, you also added
another term - wrapper. So, we have services, wrappers, protocols,
providers and portals. Still confusing to most I'm afraid.
My
general request is for "someone" to produce a single document that
organizes it all into a form understandable by the non-programmers.
Also,
does BioCASE use UDDI for discovery of the provider metadata and the data
elements available from the provider/wrapper?
Chuck
-----Original
Message-----
From: "Döring, Markus" [mailto:m.doering@BGBM.org]
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 4:27
AM
To: Chuck.Miller@mobot.org;
tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
Cc: Berendsohn, Walter G.
Subject: AW: [tdwg-tapir] FAQ page
Chuck,
from the BioCASE side I can add the
following:
BioCASE
-------
BioCASE is a European project and
its also the name of the protocol (sometimes written as BioCASe).
The BioCASE portal (software) is
referred to simply as the BioCASE portal.
The core of the BioCASE provider
software (BPS) is called PyWrapper. This wrapper understands the BioCASE
protocol, but also the Species2000/SPICE protocol. So you can use it to serve
data in ABCD, SPICE/Species2000, DarwinCore, MCPDH, NaturalCollectionMetadata
(NCD) or nearly any other XML standard with some limitations (unfortunately
used by SDD).
TAPIR
------
TAPIR refers only to the protocol.
The primary goal of TAPIR is the unification of DiGIR and BioCASE, thus
replacing them so that data providers and clients can access our data in the
same way.
There is
a full TAPIR provider software available based on the PyWrapper which is called
TAPIR PyWrapper.
There is no TAPIR portal yet or any
other client application for TAPIR.
RDF
----
In many discussions currently RDF
is considered a better way to share our data. To fully go the RDF way we would
have to migrate the TDWG XML schema standards to some sort of RDF schema or
ontology. There is still a performance problem with RDF if used with millions
of records (equivalent to maybe hundreds of millions of rdf statements). So I
dont see RDF being used right now in full production, but its surely a
promising way to go.
Personally
I am a bit concerned we are about to split the community again - this time into
TAPIR and RDF; but maybe thats how technological progress is made...
regards,
Markus
-----Ursprüngliche
Nachricht-----
Von:
tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org]
Im Auftrag von Dave Vieglais
Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Januar 2006
16:03
An: Javier privat
Cc: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
Betreff: Re: [tdwg-tapir] FAQ page
Much of
the confusion has come about I guess because DiGIR 2 is actually a code name
for a project that is building a data service application that supports pluggable
protocols. There is no official name for that application, and there is
no release (yet).
So to try
and help things a little:
DiGIR 2
is a data server application, not a protocol. The application supports
multiple protocols for accessing the data it serves including:
* DiGIR
1.5 (i.e. the current version of DiGIR)
* TAPIR (may not be a full
implementation)
* WFS (OGC Web Feature Service)
* possibly SPARQL (an RDF query
language)
DiGIR 2
data server is being developed because we do not yet feel that there is a
single unifying protocol for our community, and that new protocols may emerge
and then different versions of the protocols will be developed. Having a
single data service application that supports pluggable protocols will, we
hope, significantly reduce the maintenance and configuration overhead of those
interested in serving their data, since one the application is installed, we
expect it to be a relatively trivial matter to add protocols or updates to
existing protocols.
We will
provide more information about the project as updates become available.
regards,
Dave Vieglais
Javier de
la Torre said the following on 1/12/2006 8:23 AM:
> Dear all,
>
> We had today the GBIF ICT
Expert Group meeting and a lot of people
> where making questions about
TAPIR.
> Seems that there is confusion
regarding names. People were asking why
> there is Digir 2 if we are all
going to TAPIR and things like that.
> There were also questions
regarding when things are gonna be ready,
> what can we expect from Digir2
and TAPIR pywrapper and what would be
> the reasons to migrate, how
difficult is going to be to migrate, etc.
>
> I was thinking of extending
the FAQ page that Renato started in
> to answer all these questions,
but I need some help specially from the
> Digir2 people.
>
> -What is the status of Digir2?
> -Is it going to be difficult
to update from Digir 1 to 2?
>
> I will in any case start
writing there and maybe you can then modify
> extend thins related to you.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Javi.
>
>
_______________________________________________
> tdwg-tapir mailing list
> tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir_lists.tdwg.org
>
_______________________________________________
tdwg-tapir mailing list
tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir_lists.tdwg.org