Taxonomic hierarchy in SDD

[Robert A. (Bob) Morris]

Surely there will be other hierarchies than classical taxonomy through
which providers wish to offer inheritance. Phylogenetic hierarchies
come to mind, for example. If the problem is
inheritance, then the standard should provide for that, not for a
special case. Success would be measured by the ability of the
inheritance mechanisms to provide for the special cases.

Bob Morris

Steve Shattuck writes:
 > Date:         Tue, 27 Nov 2001 13:35:31 +1100
 > From: Steve Shattuck <Steve.Shattuck at csiro.au>
 > To: TDWG-SDD at usobi.org
 > Subject:      Taxonomic hierarchy in SDD
 >
 > The full taxonomic hierarchy of the included taxa/items certainly must be
 > supported by the standard (and it will be addressed after we deal with
 > simple characters, states and items).  If the creator of the dataset doesn't
 > think it's important then they can choose to leave it out; if the user of
 > the data doesn't think it's important then they can ignore it.  This will be
 > especially important if we intend to support inheritance and compilation up
 > and down the classification (as has been suggested by several of us).
 >
 > Jumping the gun a bit, I would think these relationships would be stored
 > either as a separate nested set of elements with ID's linking to specific
 > items, or the items themselves would be nested with parent items containing
 > their children.
 >
 > Steve Shattuck
 > CSIRO Entomology
 > biolink at ento.csiro.au
 >