[tdwg-content] proposed term: dwc:verbatimScientificName

[Richard Pyle]

No problem. Concatenate them and put them in verbatimScietificName and, if
canonical, in scientificName as well.

These are just text strings; they have no other implications.  The
relationships to taxa re inferred afterward.

I still don’t understand your statement that “the entire NCBI taxonomy
database as well as the ebird database cannot output the required format.”

Rich

From: Peter DeVries [mailto:pete.devries at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 7:12 AM
To: Richard Pyle; tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] proposed term: dwc:verbatimScientificName

Ebird and NCBI have just genus and specific epithet, most publications have
just the genus and specific epithet.

That is what you have to match against first and then try to determine what
is the most appropriate or intended authority.

Essentially you have a has many relationship with 

scientificName hasMany authorities (authorship strings)

Also what is not made clear in your earlier example is that

Every scientificName: Lobelia spicata var. spicata

is an instance of 

scientificName: Lobelia spicata

In relation to occurrence records you will have specimens of Lobelia spicata
var. spicata that were
identified as Lobelia spicata.

This should be done in away where those searching for specimens etc
of Lobelia spicata also get
those entries labeled Lobelia spicata var. spicata and Lobelia spicata ssp.
spicata etc.

Respectfully,

- Pete


On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
wrote:
They cannot provide a verbatimScientificName???? That would imply they have
no text field whatsoever.
 
From: Peter DeVries [mailto:pete.devries at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 6:47 AM
To: Richard Pyle
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] proposed term: dwc:verbatimScientificName
 
So basically what you are saying is that the entire NCBI taxonomy database
as well as the ebird database cannot output the required format.
 
- Pete
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
wrote:
I think this is *exactly* the right solution. I would go further to make it
clear that:
 
-          verbatimScientificName is the required field (with scientificName
and scientificNameAuthorship as optional)
-          When a source database maintains separate fields  corresponding
to scientificName and scientificNameAuthorship, they should be concatenated
(with a single space between them) to form the required
verbatimScientificName
 
Aloha,
Rich
 
From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
[mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of David Remsen
(GBIF)
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 6:10 AM
To: tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org List
Subject: [tdwg-content] proposed term: dwc:verbatimScientificName
 
Markus and I wanted to try to consolidate the issues related to the current
use and definition of scientificName that have been the focus of last weeks
discussion in as simple a way as we can and leave it with a simple proposal
which we will add to the issue tracking on the project site.
 
1. We propose that a new term, dwc:verbatimScientificName carry the existing
definition for dwc:scientificName and 
2. dwc:scientificName follow the more accepted convention that is better
represented by the earlier proposed definition for Canonical Name
 
The intention is to enable data publishers to distinguish unparsed, complex
scientific names from more cleanly separated scientific name data.   This
will relieve consumers of these data from testing each instance of a name
for one of these two conditions.
 
Here are the definitions for the two existing terms that have been part of
the discussion:
 
dwc:scientificName  - The full scientific name, with authorship and date
information if known. When forming part of an Identification, this should be
the name in lowest level taxonomic rank that can be determined. This term
should not contain identification qualifications, which should instead be
supplied in the IdentificationQualifier term.
 
dwc:scientificNameAuthorship - The authorship information for the
scientificName formatted according to the conventions of the applicable
nomenclaturalCode.
 
Here are terms and definitions used in the following 5 source data
configurations we came up with.   They don't have to be exact for this
purpose.
 
canonical name - The nomenclatural components of a scentific name without
authorship information.
authorship - the authorship information that follows a scientific name
verbatim name  - the verbatim text stored in a source database when it
differs from or combines the two definitions above.  This is a bit more
broad than the def for scientificName.
 
We identified the following configurations in a source database and how they
would be mapped to the existing terms.  In cases 4 and 5 we also propose how
we would map these were there a 3rd available term (called 'mapping b:')
 
When a source database contains:
 
1.  canonical names only
 
Mapping:  canonical name -> dwc:scientificName 
 
2. canonical name and authorship in two fields
 
Mapping: canonical name -> dwc:scientificName /
authorship->dwc:scientificNameAuthorship
 
3. verbatim name only
 
Mapping:  verbatim name -> dwc:scientificName
 
4. all three: canonical name, authorship, and verbatim name in 3 diff.
columns 
 
Mapping a:  verbatim name -> dwc:scientificName  /
authorship->dwc:scientificNameAuthorship
 
Mapping b:  canonical name -> dwc:scientificName  /
authorship->dwc:scientificNameAuthorship / verbatim name ->
dwc:verbatimScientificName
 
5. a mix of canonical and verbatim names in a single column
 
Mapping a:  verbatim name + canonical names -> dwc:scientificName  
 
Mapping b:  verbatim name + canonical names -> dwc:verbatimScientificName  
 
Summary - with the current two terms are left with no choice but to support
both canonical and verbatim names in a single term, which makes consuming
these data difficult.   
 
We propose that a new term, dwc:verbatimScientificName carry the existing
definition for dwc:scientificName and that dwc:scientificName follow the
more accepted convention that is better represented by the definition for
Canonical Name
 
Best,
David Remsen / Markus Döring
 
 
 

_______________________________________________
tdwg-content mailing list
tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pete DeVries
Department of Entomology
University of Wisconsin - Madison
445 Russell Laboratories
1630 Linden Drive
Madison, WI 53706
TaxonConcept Knowledge Base / GeoSpecies Knowledge Base
About the GeoSpecies Knowledge Base
------------------------------------------------------------



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pete DeVries
Department of Entomology
University of Wisconsin - Madison
445 Russell Laboratories
1630 Linden Drive
Madison, WI 53706
TaxonConcept Knowledge Base / GeoSpecies Knowledge Base
About the GeoSpecies Knowledge Base
------------------------------------------------------------