[tdwg-content] Treatise on Occurrence, tokens, and basisOfRecord [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Richard Pyle deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Fri Oct 29 03:10:41 CEST 2010

Thanks, Julian -- 

I somehow missed Stan's post (among a flurry of other emails - both from
this list, and from other sources).  Sorry about that, Stan!  So, after now
having read Stan's post, I do agree that the "who and how" (I'm leaving out
the "what they did", to avoid people mistaking it for the "what they saw")
-- that is, the "action" (in my terms) of the Event -- should, indeed, be
regarded as part of the Event, and not part of the Occurrence (although I
still maintain it could legitimately be interpreted either way).

I should also take this opportunity to mention MUSE and FishGopher as being
among the very early efforts to organize this sort of information in a form
that could be distributed over the proto-Net.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian H [mailto:humphries at mail.utexas.edu] 
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 1:09 PM
> To: Richard Pyle
> Cc: tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Treatise on Occurrence, tokens, 
> and basisOfRecord [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
> As Stan said in an earlier message today:
> "Back to the issue of event definition:  If Event is defined 
> as just the conjunction (association, intersection, join) of 
> space and time, there is nothing to tell you why this 
> particular interval is of interest."
> In other words the who and how and what they did that made 
> the event of interest.
> julian
> At 02:30 PM 10/28/2010, Richard Pyle wrote:
> > > Yeah, some act took place at that place and time. In the 
> context of 
> > > Occurrence, probably an act of sampling or collecting, and so one 
> > > should expect metadata documenting that act (who, how, etc)
> >
> >As I alluded to in my previous post, it's not clear to me 
> whether the 
> >who, how, etc. are intrinsic properties of the Event, or if 
> the "Event" 
> >simply represents the single coordinate in 4-D space-time; and the 
> >other stuff is more a function of the Occurrence (i.e., more 
> metadata 
> >about documenting the tuple of Event+Individual).  I can see 
> rational 
> >arguments either way.  My inclination is that the word "Event" goes 
> >beyond merely the space-time coordinate, and implies some sort of 
> >"action".  As such, my inclination is to define the "Event" as more 
> >than just the 4D space-time coordinate, and include who, 
> how, etc. as part of the "action" of the Event.
> >
> >As is probably obvious, I haven't throught this through extensively 
> >yet, so I reserve the right to change my mind.
> >
> >Rich
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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