[tdwg-content] DwC Occurrence [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

[Peter DeVries]

Hi Nico,

Wouldn't the individual be asserted to be an instance of a species "concept"

For instance:

The species concept http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/ICmLC#Species

<http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/ICmLC#Species>An individual of that species
concept http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/ICmLC#Individual

<http://lod.taxonconcept.org/ses/ICmLC#Individual>An occurrence that has
been asserted to be an occurrence of that species
http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9#Occurrence

<http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9#Occurrence>Which
is documented by this page
http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9.html

<http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9.html>Relationships
between these entities can be browsed via the Knowledge Base view.

<
http://lsd.taxonconcept.org/describe/?url=http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9%23Occurrence
 >

bit.ly http://bit.ly/jgRUxv

<http://bit.ly/jgRUxv>* Note that links on the HTML page will also take you
to the views of the different entities in the Knowledge Base.

Also note that someone else could assert that the individual butterfly is
actually an instance of a different species concept. One could simply
replace these assertions with their own in a separate mapping file, or
with a different predicate. Note the hypothetical links below don't work.

The individual
http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9#Individual

<
http://ocs.taxonconcept.org/ocs/f522444a-2dd9-400e-be59-47213ef38cb9#Individual>
<bioimages:individualHasStevesSpeciesConcept> <
http://lod.bioimages.org/ses/123123#Species>

* We might miss some species occurrence records when we do this, so it would
be best to avoid creating a number of basically duplicate concepts
especially if they not the same "kind" of concept.
  For instance those that are linked to a specific name or classification
hierarchy.

Respectfully,

- Pete

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 6:10 AM, Nico Cellinese <ncellinese at flmnh.ufl.edu>wrote:

> I personally like this nicely refined suggestion but to be honest, I can
> also live with the others previously made.  What I don't seem to be able to
> digest is the notion that same individual will later be equaled  by some to
> a species. That assertion is hard to swallow.
>
> Nico
>
>
> On May 31, 2011, at 3:44 AM, Paul Murray wrote:
>
> >* An Occurrence is a combination of an Individual and an Event.*>* An Occurrence is a coupling of an Individual and an Event.*>* An Occurrence is a pairing of an Individual and an Event.*
>
> *
> *
> How about:
> An Occurrence is the *reification* of an individual's involvement in
> (entaglement with? presence at? relationship to?) an event. It reifies an
> "Event involvesIndividual Individual" fact.
>
> The need for this construct is that we often need to say a number of
> additional things about an individual's involvement with (presence at) an
> event beyond simply assertin that there is some relationship. We need to say
> what tokens that individual left, what role that individual had (Predator?
> Prey? Parasite?), perhaps temporal or other limits of that particular
> individual at the event. Occurrence is the object to which these facts may
> be attached. An individual might meaningfully have more than one occurrence
> at an event - particularly in cases where events are part-of larger events,
> or where an individual somehow has multiple roles (hyenas chased away from
> their kill by a lion - or is it the other way around?).
>
> To put it another way: "reification" = "tuple" = "association table" =
> "pulling a property out into an object". More or less.
>
> To put it another another way, an Occurence object stands in relation to an
> event and an individual much as a TaxonRelationship object stands in
> relation to the two taxa it mentions. You *could* simply model taxonomy
> with a "hasSubtaxon" predicate, but we usually need to say a great deal more
> about taxonomic relationships than that.
>
>
> If you have received this transmission in error please notify us
> immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any
> attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute
> waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of
> information in the e-mail or attachments. Please consider the environment
> before printing this email.
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Email: pdevries at wisc.edu
TaxonConcept <http://www.taxonconcept.org/>  &
GeoSpecies<http://about.geospecies.org/> Knowledge
Bases
A Semantic Web, Linked Open Data <http://linkeddata.org/>  Project
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20110531/76ebe09a/attachment.html