Re: [tdwg-tag] [tdwg-content] [tdwg] another poke about Audubon Core status
As to Audubon Core (AC), a little clarification is needed.
The only thing so far adopted is the AC data model, more precisely "The Audubon Core Multimedia Resources Metadata schema (“AC schema”, or simply “AC”) is a set of metadata vocabularies for describing biodiversity-related multimedia resources and collections. The specification is independent of how these vocabularies may be represented for machine use." [1]
In particular, no artifacts akin to such things as the DwC normative document [2] have been submitted for approval, nor have artifacts akin to Simple Darwin Core [6] though some are under development (*, **). In appearance, the AC documents [1, 3 and 4] together are a bit like the most useful reference for DwC, namely [5]. But unlike [5], [3 and 4] are normative ([1] is not/). Those parts of AC are maintained in a MediaWiki, and would be relatively pointles to put in a public source code repository, perhaps except based on arguments of backup sustainability. In such a case, they would be of use only to AC maintainers, unless the repo happened to support MediaWiki.
Bob Morris TDWG Image Interest Group co-convenor and AC <co-something or other>
[1] http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core#Introduction [2] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/rdf/dwctermshistory.rdf [3] http://terms.gbif.org/wiki/Audubon_Core_Structure [4] http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core_Term_List [5] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ [6] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/xsd/tdwg_dwc_simple.xsd
(*) Readers beware: [2] is an RDF description of Darwin Core, not an RDF description of biodiversity. (**) There will be a session devoted to AC at TDWG 2014 which will hopefully be attended by those already using AC in one or another specific, albeit unsubmitted form.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:58 AM, James Macklin james.macklin@gmail.com wrote:
I am also in favor of the GitHub repo but we really need to hear from Stan about the status of the work he was having done on the TDWG site. We will need to decide which is the "official" repo but as others point out there is likely good reason to have duplication! We also need to figure out who has time to do this if we go forward. Looks like there have already been a couple of hands partly raised ;-)
Best, James
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Bob Morris morris.bob@gmail.com wrote:
That was the answer in June too... On Sep 22, 2014 9:23 AM, "Kampmeier, Gail E" gkamp@illinois.edu wrote:
Stan Blum is working with contractors on the new TDWG site. --Gail
From: tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] on behalf of Dave Vieglais [vieglais@ku.edu] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 08:20 To: Tim Robertson Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List; tdwg@lists.tdwg.org; tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org; Stoner, Dan Subject: Re: [tdwg] [tdwg-tag] another poke about Audubon Core status
Would a GitHub organization satisfy the requirements of the TDWG site?
- Dave V.
On 22 Sep 2014, at 8:46, Tim Robertson wrote:
Hi Dan,
Thanks for your offer.
As far as I recall, the TDWG executive decided at the last meeting to move onto a whole new platform and put contractor money aside to make it happen. I’m reluctant to point you at the tangled mess of the current system when I suspect it is to be replaced anyway. It really is a convoluted mess of Typo3 plugins, which try and keep a bunch of backend systems in sync and dues to bugs in there it does not work as expected. I really don’t think it is something you want to get into, but I sympathise that the TDWG site is broken and no-one is maintaining it… a simpler vanilla CMS solution that even requires more manual text editing etc. will be a far more manageable solution in my opinion.
@TDWG Executive folks - is it still the intention to contract out and do a basic CMS site? If not, I’ll try and pull up the code but I’d need your approval to get him a DB dump as it holds user credentials / subscriptions etc. Please can you advise us? Anything we can do to help?
Thanks, Tim
On 19 Sep 2014, at 23:05, Stoner, Dan dstoner@acis.ufl.edu wrote:
I see in the tdwg-tag mailing list archives that the status of the Audubon Core Standard has been discussed recently:
http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-tag/2014-June/002558.html
So consider this another poke about getting the web site updated with the official status of the Standard.
If there is anything I can do to facilitate the web site update, please let me know (as in, I am volunteering to hack code or whatever is needed).
Thanks,
Dan Stoner iDigBio / ACIS Laboratory University of Florida _______________________________________________ tdwg-tag mailing list tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
tdwg-tag mailing list tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag
tdwg mailing list tdwg@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg _______________________________________________ tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
In the case of both Darwin Core and Audubon Core, they exist in two forms: a human-friendly version on the web and an official archived version. For DwC, the human-friendly version is the web pages linked to http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/ and for AC it's the pages linked to http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core . However, technically, the standard is the set of documents that you get when you download the archive from the standard's permanent URL, http://www.tdwg.org/standards/450/ for DwC, and http://www.tdwg.org/standards/638/ for AC . In the case of AC, the archive contains the versions of those web pages as they existed at ratification. In the case of DwC, it contains the web pages and RDF documents as they existed after the last Decision that resulted in a change to the standard (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/history/decisions/index.htm Decision-2013-10-09_13).
This is a somewhat unwieldy system, since a citation of the "permanent URL" for the standard leads to a version that is difficult to view and which doesn't necessarily lead to the human-readable websites (although in the cases of both AC and DwC, there are links to those websites if one reads the fine print on the standard's cover page). But the point of the archives is that they contain a version of the standard documents in the form in which they existed the last time they were officially approved. For some standards, the archives are the ONLY version that is viewable at all. So it's important that those official versions be stored in some immutable form that is not subject to accidental tinkering or deletion as could happen with a regular website (as we have seen happen with TAPIR). In the case of DwC, the standard has changed over time. Those changes can be tracked on a large scale by looking at the decision history, but on a detailed scale one would have to look at the Darwin Core Google Code subversion repository (if one knew to look there and what to look for among the myriad documents stored there).
In my view, the cover pages that resolve from the standards' cover pages (e.g. http://www.tdwg.org/standards/638/ ) should tell a user how to locate a human-friendly web-viewable version, as well as how to access an archive under version control (e.g. git or subversion) that contains the official record. Not all of the standards have human-friendly web versions.
Steve
Bob Morris wrote:
As to Audubon Core (AC), a little clarification is needed.
The only thing so far adopted is the AC data model, more precisely "The Audubon Core Multimedia Resources Metadata schema (“AC schema”, or simply “AC”) is a set of metadata vocabularies for describing biodiversity-related multimedia resources and collections. The specification is independent of how these vocabularies may be represented for machine use." [1]
In particular, no artifacts akin to such things as the DwC normative document [2] have been submitted for approval, nor have artifacts akin to Simple Darwin Core [6] though some are under development (*, **). In appearance, the AC documents [1, 3 and 4] together are a bit like the most useful reference for DwC, namely [5]. But unlike [5], [3 and 4] are normative ([1] is not/). Those parts of AC are maintained in a MediaWiki, and would be relatively pointles to put in a public source code repository, perhaps except based on arguments of backup sustainability. In such a case, they would be of use only to AC maintainers, unless the repo happened to support MediaWiki.
Bob Morris TDWG Image Interest Group co-convenor and AC <co-something or other>
[1] http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core#Introduction [2] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/rdf/dwctermshistory.rdf [3] http://terms.gbif.org/wiki/Audubon_Core_Structure [4] http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core_Term_List [5] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ [6] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/xsd/tdwg_dwc_simple.xsd
(*) Readers beware: [2] is an RDF description of Darwin Core, not an RDF description of biodiversity. (**) There will be a session devoted to AC at TDWG 2014 which will hopefully be attended by those already using AC in one or another specific, albeit unsubmitted form.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:58 AM, James Macklin <james.macklin@gmail.com mailto:james.macklin@gmail.com> wrote:
I am also in favor of the GitHub repo but we really need to hear from Stan about the status of the work he was having done on the TDWG site. We will need to decide which is the "official" repo but as others point out there is likely good reason to have duplication! We also need to figure out who has time to do this if we go forward. Looks like there have already been a couple of hands partly raised ;-) Best, James On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com <mailto:morris.bob@gmail.com>> wrote: That was the answer in June too... On Sep 22, 2014 9:23 AM, "Kampmeier, Gail E" <gkamp@illinois.edu <mailto:gkamp@illinois.edu>> wrote: Stan Blum is working with contractors on the new TDWG site. --Gail ________________________________________ From: tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org> [tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-bounces@lists.tdwg.org>] on behalf of Dave Vieglais [vieglais@ku.edu <mailto:vieglais@ku.edu>] Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 08:20 To: Tim Robertson Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List; tdwg@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org>; tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org>; Stoner, Dan Subject: Re: [tdwg] [tdwg-tag] another poke about Audubon Core status Would a GitHub organization satisfy the requirements of the TDWG site? - Dave V. On 22 Sep 2014, at 8:46, Tim Robertson wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Thanks for your offer. > > As far as I recall, the TDWG executive decided at the last meeting to > move onto a whole new platform and put contractor money aside to make > it happen. > I’m reluctant to point you at the tangled mess of the current system > when I suspect it is to be replaced anyway. It really is a convoluted > mess of Typo3 plugins, which try and keep a bunch of backend systems > in sync and dues to bugs in there it does not work as expected. I > really don’t think it is something you want to get into, but I > sympathise that the TDWG site is broken and no-one is maintaining > it… a simpler vanilla CMS solution that even requires more manual > text editing etc. will be a far more manageable solution in my > opinion. > > @TDWG Executive folks - is it still the intention to contract out and > do a basic CMS site? > If not, I’ll try and pull up the code but I’d need your approval > to get him a DB dump as it holds user credentials / subscriptions etc. > Please can you advise us? Anything we can do to help? > > Thanks, > Tim > > > On 19 Sep 2014, at 23:05, Stoner, Dan <dstoner@acis.ufl.edu <mailto:dstoner@acis.ufl.edu>> wrote: > >> I see in the tdwg-tag mailing list archives that the status of the >> Audubon Core Standard has been discussed recently: >> >> http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-tag/2014-June/002558.html >> >> >> So consider this another poke about getting the web site updated with >> the official status of the Standard. >> >> If there is anything I can do to facilitate the web site update, >> please let me know (as in, I am volunteering to hack code or whatever >> is needed). >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Dan Stoner >> iDigBio / ACIS Laboratory >> University of Florida >> _______________________________________________ >> tdwg-tag mailing list >> tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org> >> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag >> > > _______________________________________________ > tdwg-tag mailing list > tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag _______________________________________________ tdwg mailing list tdwg@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg@lists.tdwg.org> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg _______________________________________________ tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content _______________________________________________ tdwg-content mailing list tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org <mailto:tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content-- Robert A. Morris
Emeritus Professor of Computer Science UMASS-Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd Boston, MA 02125-3390
Filtered Push Project Harvard University Herbaria Harvard University
email: morris.bob@gmail.com mailto:morris.bob@gmail.com web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/ web: http://wiki.filteredpush.org http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram http://www.cs.umb.edu/%7Eram === The content of this communication is made entirely on my own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or Harvard University.
participants (2)
-
Bob Morris -
Steve Baskauf