[tdwg-content] Clarifying the nature of TDWG Standards document categories, was Re: A radical proposal for Darwin Core
Steve Baskauf
steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu
Wed Jul 3 22:54:51 CEST 2013
Joel,
Within the last year I did confirm with John Wieczorek that the
dwctermshistory.rdf is THE one normative document of Darwin Core. One
would have no way to know that other than personally asking John since I
have never found anything in writing which states that. The connection
between dwctermshistory.rdf and the RDF served when the terms are
dereferenced is a bit tenuous, but if you drill down into the term
definitions that get served via the dwcterms.rdf document, they are
linked to the historical terms via dcterms:hasVersion and
dcterms:replaces properties although I'm not sure I can explain how a
semantic client would follow its nose to the dwctermshistory.rdf
document. I don't know what went into the decision to set DwC up this
way since it was before my time. John W. may have further comments.
In a previous email which I'm not going to attempt to look up in the
archives, I asked (begged?) that the Darwin Core RDF documents be
clearly marked as to whether they were normative or not because I've
been confused about this exact thing for several years. I was thinking
that the recommendations of the VoMaG draft report on vocabulary
management included clearly demarcating which document is normative in a
standard, but I just looked at the report again
(http://community.gbif.org/pg/file/read/34059/ ) and didn't see it. The
section 4.3 Recommendation 5 says "As part of its documentation, a
vocabulary must include machine readable metadata expressed, e.g., in
RDF, that describe the main characteristics of the vocabulary." Perhaps
this recommendation should be amended to say that one particular
characteristic to be described is the identity of the type 1 (normative)
document for the vocabulary if it is a standard. Since the VoMaG report
is in the middle of its public comment period, this would be an
excellent comment to make. I'm not going to make it since I'm one of
the authors, but anybody else could.
Steve
joel sachs wrote:
>
> On Mon, 1 Jul 2013, Steve Baskauf wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> To illustrate this with Darwin Core, the single normative (Type 1)
>> RDF document is
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwctermshistory.rdf
>>
>
> </snip>
>
> Steve,
>
> Are you sure that that document is *the* normative Darwin Core? Consider:
>
> i. It is not included in the Download from the Darwin Core Cover Page,
> http://www.tdwg.org/standards/450/
> (I admit that this is weak evidence, since every document that is
> included in the download is outdated. So whatever the normative
> standard is, it's not included in the Download from the Darwin Core
> Cover Page - strange but true.)
>
> ii. It does not define any Darwin Core terms. For example, the
> document defines
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/dwctype/PreservedSpecimen-2008-11-19
> and
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/dwctype/PreservedSpecimen-2011-10-16
> but not
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/dwctype/PreservedSpecimen
>
>
> I always assumed that the normative standard was defined by
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/rdf/dwcterms.rdf and
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/rdf/dwctype.rdf,
> and (perhaps)
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/ and http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/dwctype/
>
>
> Could someone please clarify?
>
> Many thanks,
> Joel.
>
>
--
Steven J. Baskauf, Ph.D., Senior Lecturer
Vanderbilt University Dept. of Biological Sciences
postal mail address:
PMB 351634
Nashville, TN 37235-1634, U.S.A.
delivery address:
2125 Stevenson Center
1161 21st Ave., S.
Nashville, TN 37235
office: 2128 Stevenson Center
phone: (615) 343-4582, fax: (615) 322-4942
If you fax, please phone or email so that I will know to look for it.
http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu
More information about the tdwg-content
mailing list