Roger wrote:
[...] We are building a global system so we have to be able to reconcile different encodings of the same object types.
Bob Morris replies:
I don't see anything in the TDWG Constitution that calls for a "global system". Any discussion of system building surely represents an interpretation of Article 1, in which the only explicit activity mentioned is that TDWG "develops, adopts and promotes standards and guidelines for the recording and exchange of data about organisms". Whether building systems at all is within the purview of TDWG, is probably beyond the mandate of the Secretariat to determine. If standards building is the focus instead of systems building, it does not follow logically that encodings have to be reconciled. I don't think standards bodies are obliged to make their standards reconciled with other people's standards. Doing so could only fall within Article 1.b, in which TDWG "promotes [the standards'] use through the most appropriate and effective means." That is so vague as to not consistute a requirement, and so addressing it with architecture probably needs more agreement in the organization about what it really means.
I share with Javier a concern that the architecture discussions may be conflating TDWG with GBIF. I am not necesarily opposed to this, and I even suspect Article 1 may in fact need revision. I just doubt that, if conflation with the goals of GBIF is inadvertantly happening, it is happening without consent of the membership.
Bob
Tdwg-tag mailing list Tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag_lists.tdwg.org