[tdwg-content] A plea around basisOfRecord (Was: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance, abundanceAsPercent)

[Steve Baskauf]

Donald,

With regards to the uncertainty about the meaning of dwc:basisOfRecord, 
the proposed Darwin Core RDF Guide attempts to inject clarity into the 
situation.   It does so in two ways:

1. It allows dwc:basisOfRecord to be used with literal (text) values to 
allow existing implementations to expose whatever values they currently 
have for that term.  However, it specifies that rdf:type should be used 
exclusively as the property for specifying URI-reference values intended 
to indicate the type of the subject resource. [1]  There is some 
ambiguity about what the subject is of a dwc:basisOrRecord property (the 
resource, or the record about the resource?).  However, there is no 
similar ambiguity about rdf:type which always serves to indicate the 
class of which the subject resource is an instance.

2. It specifies that classes in the Darwin Core Type vocabulary 
namespace (dwctype: = http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/dwctype/ ) should be used 
for typing resources in the biodiversity domain rather than any 
corresponding classes in the main Darwin Core namespace (dwc: = 
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/ ).  [2]  In other words, if given the 
choice between dwc:Occurrence and dwctype:Occurrence, use 
dwctype:Occurrence.  The guide proposes to add to the type vocabulary 
any classes which  exist in the dwc: namespace and not in the dwctype: 
namespace (e.g. dwc:Identification).  The intention is that the DwC type 
vocabulary would be what it's name suggests: the vocabulary for 
describing types.  There are some issues involving the current 
definitions in the type vocabulary, which I won't go into in this 
email.  As Rich said earlier, this is a topic for one of the Documenting 
Darwin Core sessions at the meeting.

Although these guidelines would hold force specifically for RDF 
implementations, this is a convention that could be followed in other 
implementations. 

Steve

[1] 
http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/DwcRdfGuideProposal#2.3.1.4_Other_predicates_used_to_indicate_type
[2] 
http://code.google.com/p/tdwg-rdf/wiki/DwcRdfGuideProposal#2.3.1.5_Classes_to_be_used_for_type_declarations_of_resources_de

Donald Hobern [GBIF] wrote:
>
> Thanks, Rich.
>
>  
>
> Very pleased to see this.  With this encouragement, I'll say just a 
> little bit more about why I think this is a critical need.
>
>  
>
> I see the model I describe as the perfect real-world realisation of 
> most of the key components in the GBIO Framework 
> (http://www.biodiversityinformatics.org/), as follows:
>
>  
>
> 1.       Everyone zips up whatever data they have from each resource 
> (databases, field instruments, sequencers, data extracted from 
> literature, checklists, whatever) into a DwC Archive using whatever 
> DwC elements they can for data elements and describing other elements 
> not currently recognised in DwC (the GBIO DATA layer)
>
> 2.       These archives should be placed in repositories that offer 
> basic services (DOIs, annotation services, etc.) (the GBIO CULTURE layer)
>
> 3.       Harvesters assess the contents of each archive and determine 
> what views can be supported from the supplied elements (occurrence 
> records for GBIF, name usage records, species interactions, etc.) and 
> catalogue these views in relevant discovery indexes (GBIF, Catalogue 
> of Life, TraitBank, etc.) (the GBIO EVIDENCE layer)
>
> 4.       Users can at any time annotate elements in the archives to 
> provide mappings for (potentially more recently defined) DwC or other 
> properties, opening up new options for reuse
>
>  
>
> Donald
>
>  
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
>
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
>
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark
>
> Tel: +45 3532 1471  Mob: +45 2875 1471  Fax: +45 2875 1480
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Pyle [mailto:deepreef at bishopmuseum.org]
> Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2013 6:49 PM
> To: 'Donald Hobern [GBIF]'; 'TDWG Content Mailing List'
> Cc: 'Chuck Miller'
> Subject: RE: [tdwg-content] A plea around basisOfRecord (Was: Proposed 
> new Darwin Core terms - abundance, abundanceAsPercent)
>
>  
>
> Hi Donald,
>
>  
>
> MANY thanks for this!  And you are certainly not alone in your 
> concerns about these issues.  In fact, we have planned a Symposium for 
> "Documenting DarwinCore"
>
> (https://mbgserv18.mobot.org/ocs/index.php/tdwg/2013/schedConf/trackPolicies
>
> #track11), and one of the four sessions (Session 3, to be precise) of 
> the symposium focuses exactly on this issue of 
> basisOfRecord/dcterms:type/etc.
>
>  
>
> Another session (Session 2) will focus on proposed and 
> perhaps-to-be-proposed new classes (Individual, MaterialSample, 
> Evidence), and will start out with a series graphs illustrating the 
> existing high-level ontology and possible alternative high-level 
> ontologies, as you indicate in your items 3 & 4.
>
>  
>
> Aloha,
>
> Rich
>

-- 
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20131013/786e836c/attachment.html