Re: [tdwg-tapir] TaxonAPI

So inventories dont seem to be important for any of the taxon APIs. Do we then still want to provide parameterised inventories? -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] Im Auftrag von Dave Vieglais Gesendet: Montag, 28. November 2005 18:40 An: roger@tdwg.org Cc: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Betreff: Re: [tdwg-tapir] TaxonAPI Hi Roger, You might also like to examine http://seek.ecoinformatics.org/Wiki.jsp?page=TOSAPISignatures The interfaces and implementation have been developed as part of the SEEK project. regards, Dave V. Roger Hyam wrote:
_______________________________________________ tdwg-tapir mailing list tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tapir_lists.tdwg.org

Inventory requests can allow us to escape from the problem Roger describes on the Wiki of being unable to discover all data from a nomenclatural provider (and the need to enforce a single root element for concepts). Indexing IPNI for example would be very difficult without an inventory request of some kind. There are clearly various ways of doing this. One could be to include a message in the API getNamesByRank() (and perhaps another getIncludedRanks()). Something like this might be less stress on a large resource than getNamesInventory(). Donald --------------------------------------------------------------- Donald Hobern (dhobern@gbif.org) Programme Officer for Data Access and Database Interoperability Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark Tel: +45-35321483 Mobile: +45-28751483 Fax: +45-35321480 --------------------------------------------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of "Döring, Markus" Sent: 29 November 2005 10:40 To: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Subject: Re: [tdwg-tapir] TaxonAPI So inventories dont seem to be important for any of the taxon APIs. Do we then still want to provide parameterised inventories? -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] Im Auftrag von Dave Vieglais Gesendet: Montag, 28. November 2005 18:40 An: roger@tdwg.org Cc: tdwg-tapir@lists.tdwg.org Betreff: Re: [tdwg-tapir] TaxonAPI Hi Roger, You might also like to examine http://seek.ecoinformatics.org/Wiki.jsp?page=TOSAPISignatures The interfaces and implementation have been developed as part of the SEEK project. regards, Dave V. Roger Hyam wrote:
_______________________________________________ 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

One man's search is another man's inventory! I was thinking that the actual objects returned by these requests are quite small so there is no point in returning anything smaller. A call to GetTNamesMatching() passing a modified_after date of a very long time ago and paging parameters would effectively crawl over the whole resource. I need to expand on the modification date thing - probably in a few days. getNamesByRank() would be GetTNamesMatching(rank_code=gen) or something along those lines. Rank codes would be limited to those in TCS anyhow so you could crawl over the whole data source this way if you wanted. Obviously some would return empty results. I need to expand on the parameter things. Does this solve inventory problems? GBIFDataPortal.GetAllOccurrenceRecords() might be popular with the compulsive data hoarders! Roger Donald Hobern wrote:
-- ------------------------------------- Roger Hyam Technical Architect Taxonomic Databases Working Group ------------------------------------- http://www.tdwg.org roger@tdwg.org +44 1578 722782 -------------------------------------
participants (3)
-
"Döring, Markus"
-
Donald Hobern
-
Roger Hyam