Hi Roger,

I can see that it will be very difficult to come up with a set of hierarchical terms that everyone will agree with. The subclassing approach, unless we restrict it to one level (all classes are direct children of InfoItem) is thus problematic. Is it possible to simply assign multiple categories to an InfoItem? Something like the following statement - This InfoItem has category "dispersal" and has category "asexual reproduction".

I agree that it is restrictive to let a transport protocol dictate our data model but, in any case, there was a suggestion (from Donald I think) that we could make the category approach work by doing an inventory call first.

SKOS allows the constructing of full blown ontologies but I take it you are suggesting that we restrict ourselves to just flat vocabulary lists. I like your idea of having OWL as an optional add-on to reason over our categories.

Éamonn

-----Original Message----- From: tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of tdwg-tag-request@lists.tdwg.org Sent: 08 October 2007 13:53 To: tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org Subject: tdwg-tag Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1

Send tdwg-tag mailing list submissions to tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to tdwg-tag-request@lists.tdwg.org

You can reach the person managing the list at tdwg-tag-owner@lists.tdwg.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of tdwg-tag digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. SPM Categories or Subclassing - again. (Roger Hyam) 2. Re: SPM Categories or Subclassing - again. (Donald Hobern)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1 Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 11:51:11 +0100 From: Roger Hyam roger@tdwg.org Subject: [tdwg-tag] SPM Categories or Subclassing - again. To: tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org Message-ID: 89F4B714-003E-4512-BCF3-8EA68BF0230E@tdwg.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi All,

I'd like to re-ignite a debate we had over the summer in the light of what was discussed at Bratislava and things I am thinking about now.

The original way the Species Profile Model was structure was to have something like the attached UML diagram tagging.png