[tdwg-content] proposed term: dwc:verbatimScientificName

[Richard Pyle]

> Rich, it is not a question of __formatting__; concatenation is just not
> possible, you have to parse into EVERY name, take it apart, determine
> whether it is an autonym, and if so __insert__ the author at the correct
> position for botanical names.

Yes, but that's the responsibility of the provider.  Either they have the
information sufficiently atomized to populate verbatimScientificName
appropriately for autonyms, or they just have a pre-formatted
"scientificNameWithAuthorship" (which can go in verbatimScientificName), or
they do not have autonyms appropriately formatted, in which case we can't
really do anything for them.

Thus, the expected content would be:
verbatimScientificName: Lobelia spicata Lam. var. spicata
scientificName: Lobelia spicata var. spicata
scientificNameAuthorship: Lam.

> I understand this is tough on Zoologists :-), but I therefore propose

Actually, it's the botanists who are making things tough in this case... :-)

> verbatimScientificName
> scientificName
> scientificNameAuthorship,
> scientificNameWithAuthorship
> 
> This covers all cases in my opinion. The comments should express, that
> scientificNameWithAuthorship should follow allow canonical name rules and
> recommendations of the respective Code.

I'm still not convinced we need scientificNameWithAuthorship.

Aloha,
Rich