[tdwg-content] dwc: city to county

John R. WIECZOREK tuco at berkeley.edu
Wed Aug 26 18:45:49 CEST 2009

Yes, I think the "accordingTo" term would be useful and nicely
parallel to what we do with Taxon. It will allow gazetteers to be
shared with Darwin Core using records having dcterms:type="Location".
I would call it locationAccordingTo, and it would be distinct from

I didn't think about using higherGeographyID in the way you are
suggesting, but you're correct, it fits perfectly. Given this
epiphany, I don't think the city term is needed to cover Gregor's use
case. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I would not use id's in the other geographic terms (Country,
stateProvince, county, etc.).

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 7:18 AM, "Markus Döring
(GBIF)"<mdoering at gbif.org> wrote:
> One more thing came to my mind just now.
> For taxa we have a taxonAccordingTo, shouldnt there also be a
> geographyAccordingTo term to indicate the source of the place names?
> That could be pretty useful I would think.
> On Aug 26, 2009, at 16:16, Markus Döring (GBIF) wrote:
>> I just realized that there is dwc:higherGeographyID already that fits
>> perfectly to hold the city gazeteer ID:
>> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#higherGeographyID
>> so for a location within the city of san francisco we can use:
>> dwc:higherGeographyID =tgn: 7014456
>> Markus
>> On Aug 26, 2009, at 15:41, Markus Döring (GBIF) wrote:
>>>>>> Darwin Core is able to transmit Gazetteer IDs for the kind of
>>>>>> objects
>>>>>> you are talking about (generally called "features" or "named
>>>>>> places")
>>>>>> that are present in gazetteers. Not only that, gazetteers can have
>>>>>> detailed information (georeferences with uncertainties) about
>>>>>> places
>>>>>> with complex descriptions as well as simple named places. BioGeoBIF
>>>>>> does this, and a Locality service I have long wanted to build has
>>>>>> exactly this intention. What Darwin Core can't do is give a
>>>>>> gazetteer
>>>>>> id for some part of the Location, only for the whole. In other
>>>>>> words,
>>>>>> it can't do what you want it to do. I don't think Darwin Core
>>>>>> should.
>>>>>> I think the far better solution is to use universal terms - the
>>>>>> spatial data - for the use case you are proposing.
>>>>> There is a big difference between city being S. Francisco and the
>>>>> location being detail inside of it, and city being S. Francisco and
>>>>> the location being 200 km S of it.
>>>> Yes, I agree. They are very different. Assuming there was a "city"
>>>> term in DwC, I would not want someone to put San Francisco as the
>>>> city
>>>> if the Location was outside of the city. In other words, no
>>>> geographic
>>>> term is to be used to represent a "nearest named place", instead,
>>>> they
>>>> are to be used only to designate containment of the specific place.
>>>>> So for the use case where the the detailed location is inside the
>>>>> boundaries defined by a gazeetter ID, I am still assuming that DWC
>>>>> can
>>>>> transmit the data ONLY if no more detailed data are given. Or this a
>>>>> misunderstanding?
>>>> You understand correctly. Darwin Core can transmit all of the detail
>>>> about the place, no matter how specific, but it cannot transmit any
>>>> gazetteer id that does not correspond to the whole Location in all
>>>> its
>>>> detail.
>>> Would it hurt to put the gazateer ID into a higher geographic term?
>>> for the county of san francisco:
>>> dwc:county=TGN:1002859
>>> for the city one could use the locality is there is no finer
>>> description of the exact place:
>>> dwc:locality=tgn: 7014456
>>> Remarkably the getty thesaurus also uses similar terms for the
>>> geographic hierarchy:
>>> http://www.getty.edu/vow/TGNFullDisplay?find=san+francisco&place=city&nation=&prev_page=1&english=Y&subjectid=7014456
>>> North and Central America (continent)
>>> United States (nation)
>>> California (state)
>>> San Francisco (county)
>>> San Francisco (inhabited place)
>>> Well, for a German town this is slightly different:
>>> Europe (continent)
>>> Germany (nation)
>>> Lower Saxony (state)
>>> Hannover (national district)
>>> Holzminden (inhabited place)
>>> If all it takes is to add a dwc:city or dwc:inhabitedPlace term, I
>>> think I would second that.
>>> Alternatively the most relevant bit apart from the locationID and
>>> exact locality is the next higher region that contains the exact
>>> location - no matter what rank.
>>> Something like a dwc:namedArea
>>> Markus
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content

More information about the tdwg-content mailing list