[tdwg-content] New term resolution: dcterms:source

[John Wieczorek]

@Gregor - I didn't intend to remove dcterms:source from consideration, I
just intended to keep dwc:occurrenceDetails.

It sounds like there is still support for dcterms:source independent of
issues surrounding occurrenceDetails.

I like Markus' suggestion to generalize the term we have to something like
the following, deprecating occurrenceDetails in favor of:

Term Name: recordUri
Identifier:     http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/recordUri
Namespace:      http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label:  recordUri
Definition:     A reference (publication, URI) to detailed information about
the record.
Comment:        Example: "http://mvzarctos.berkeley.edu/guid/MVZ:Mamm:165861".
For discussion see http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/RecordLevelTerms
.
Type of Term:   http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: recommended
Date Issued:    2011-07-07
Date Modified:  2011-07-07
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Version:        recordUri-2011-07-07
Replaces:       occurrenceDetails-2009-04-24
Is Replaced By:
Class:  all
ABCD 2.06:      DataSets/DataSet/Units/Unit/RecordURI

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Markus Döring <m.doering at mac.com> wrote:

> the original intent of the dc:source issue was "A URI link or reference to
> the source of this record. A link to a webpage or RESTful webservice is
> recommended. URI is mandatory format. Allows to link to richer source data."
> When writing this I had taxonomic dwc records in mind and I needed a way to
> capture a link to a webpage or service that potentially contains richer
> data. So originally the intent was exactly the same as occurrenceDetails -
> just not limited to occurrences.
>
> how about a generic dwc:details(Uri) instead?
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 6, 2011, at 19:47, John Wieczorek wrote:
>
> > I see and agree with what you are saying. I retract the proposal to
> remove occurrenceDetails.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Paul J. Morris <mole at morris.net> wrote:
> > I'd concur with John except for that pesky little word in the
> > definition of dcterms:source, "derived"
> >
> > "A related resource from which the described resource is derived."
> >
> > The history of recordURL, relatedInformation, and occurrenceDetails all
> have exactly the opposite meaning in my mind.  All three of those were
> places to find additional information that was derived from some set of
> primary objects (specimen, field notes, map, etc).  A publication that
> synthesises the most detailed information about an occurrence is derived
> from these primary sources of information.  Carrying such a publication as a
> dcterms:source seems exactly backwards.
> >
> > I wouldn't mind using dcterms:source to indicate that a specimen label is
> derived from field notes or that a specimen label is derived from a ledger
> entry.  However I would object to dcterms:source being used to indicate that
> a publication is the source of a specimen record, when the reality is almost
> certainly the other way around.
> >
> > I don't concur that the intent of dcterms:source is similar in definition
> or intent to occurrenceDetails.
> >
> > -Paul
> >
> > On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 10:09:02 -0700
> > John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > I agree that the meaning of dcterms:source is different from the
> > > stated meaning of dwc:occurrenceDetails. The latter term originated
> > > with OBIS as
> > >
> > > recordURL - Gives the web address of the page where more information
> > > on this particular record (not on the whole dataset) can be found.
> > >
> > > and was re-cast in Darwin Core 1.4 as
> > >
> > > relatedInformation - Free text references to information not
> > > delivered via the conceptual schema, including URLs to specimen
> > > details, publications, bibliographic references, etc.
> > >
> > > and is currently defined as
> > >
> > > occurrenceDetails - A reference (publication, URI) to the most
> > > detailed information
> > > available about the Occurrence.
> > >
> > > So, one could argue that the dcterms:source is not necessarily the
> > > most detailed information available, and it would certainly not be
> > > only about Occurrences.
> > >
> > > So, occurrenceDetails certainly is no substitute for dcterms:source,
> > > and dcterms:source doesn't exactly circumscribe occurrenceDetails as
> > > defined. Nevertheless, the concepts are so nearly the same in
> > > definition, and certainly in intent, that I propose that adding
> > > dcterms:source obviates the need for occurrenceDetails as it will
> > > sufficiently cover the intended use of occurrenceDetails while
> > > allowing the same for all record types.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Gregor Hagedorn
> > > <g.m.hagedorn at gmail.com>wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think the two terms are different.
> > > >
> > > > my understanding is that dcterms source expresses a relation
> > > > between a (usually digital) record and another record, that is
> > > > derived from the first.
> > > >
> > > > I think this is very useful in DwC in cases, where records are taken
> > > > directly from a publication.
> > > >
> > > > However, it does not replace the fact that the source of the record
> > > > is the digitization project of collection X and that the record is
> > > > also cited in a recent publication.
> > > >
> > > > I have doubts whether occurrenceDetail is a good label for the
> > > > latter concept, however.
> > > >
> > > > Gregor
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Paul J. Morris
> > Biodiversity Informatics Manager
> > Harvard University Herbaria/Museum of Comparative Zoölogy
> > mole at morris.net  AA3SD  PGP public key available
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tdwg-content mailing list
> > tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20110707/2182bb03/attachment.html