[tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance, abundanceAsPercent
Éamonn Ó Tuama [GBIF]
eotuama at gbif.org
Thu Oct 24 13:30:16 CEST 2013
Following all the excellent contributions on this list relating to
expressing abundance data in Darwin Core, I think we may have uncovered a
way that does not require any changes to the DwC standard. As has been
pointed out, modelling sampling and abundance can be quite complex and
challenging and is best done as an ontology (as in the work of the BCO).
>From the GBIF perspective, our goal is to make it as simple as possible for
data providers to deliver abundance data (in Darwin Core Archive format)
that can support the science for processes such as CBD and IPBES. Here, I am
using the term abundance (specifically population abundance) in the sense
defined by GEO BON: "Quantity of individuals or biomass of a given taxon or
functional group at a given location" [1].
The challenge is to come up with a way for Simple Darwin Core to express
abundance data. It looks like we can probably work within the restrictions
imposed by Simple Darwin Core [2] and use properties from MeasurementOrFact
because, for the use case in question here, we only need to share one
MeasurementOrFact per record.
The model: A sample, associated with a sampling protocol has one or more
taxon occurrence records each of which has an abundance measure which is
expressed using MeasurementOrFact.
At a minimum, we would need the following three MeasurementOrFact properties
listed below (with definition and examples):
measurementType
The nature of the measurement, fact, characteristic, or assertion.
Examples: "tail length", "temperature", "trap line length", "survey area",
"trap type".
For abundances we would use: count, percentage
measurementValue
The value of the measurement, fact, characteristic, or assertion.
Examples: "45", "20", "1", "14.5", "UV-light".
For abundances we would use any numeric value.
measurementMethod
A description of or reference to (publication, URI) the method or protocol
used to determine the measurement, fact, characteristic, or assertion.
Examples: "minimum convex polygon around burrow entrances" for a home range
area, "barometric altimeter" for an elevation.
For abundances we would use: Count/sq metre, count/litre, % of biovolume, %
of species, ...
To enable automated processing, we would need to develop a controlled list
for measurementMethod and, ideally, there would also be a URI for the
sampling protocol used which would be recorded in the dwc:samplingProtocol
field.
[1]
http://www.earthobservations.org/documents/meetings/201202_geobon_ebv/30_ebv
_species_table_v2.pdf
[2] http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules
-----Original Message-----
From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
[mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of
tdwg-content-request at lists.tdwg.org
Sent: 26 September 2013 17:23
To: tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
Subject: tdwg-content Digest, Vol 53, Issue 2
Send tdwg-content mailing list submissions to
tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
tdwg-content-request at lists.tdwg.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
tdwg-content-owner at lists.tdwg.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of tdwg-content digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
(John Wieczorek)
2. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core environmental terms from ENVO
(John Wieczorek)
3. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
4. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Donald Hobern [GBIF])
5. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Robert Guralnick)
6. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Chuck Miller)
7. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Donald Hobern [GBIF])
8. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
9. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (John Wieczorek)
10. Re: Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent (Robert Guralnick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:44:34 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental
terms from ENVO
To: Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdOf7rMwQ3UCGGw1T53c4J7X=amJ_ibSkSX_WSb5EoqcA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Dear all,
The spirit of the proposal is to satisfy use cases defined in the
document "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" found at
http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 by reusing terms from the ENVO
ontology. Steve is correct. All of the ENVO terms are classes in
keeping with the OBO Foundry way of doing things. As such, they don't
work in the intended Darwin Core context as they currently stand,
where what we want are properties whose values can come from ENVO as a
controlled vocabulary in the way Hilmar described.
To satisfy the spirit of the proposal, I suggest that instead of
replacing the dwc:habitat property with the envo:habitat class and
adding the other three ENVO classes, we modify the existing
dwc:habitat property and introduce new properties whose ranges are
recommended to be the appropriate ENVO classes, as follows:
Retain the property term dwc:habitat, but amend the definition to be:
Term Name: habitat
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Habitat
Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
sustain an organism or a community of organisms. Recommended best
practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
habitat class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2008-11-19
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: habitat-2013-09-26
Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Add the following new property terms for biome,
environmental feature, and environmental material:
Term Name: biome
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Biome
Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
ecological succession and climax vegetation. Recommended best practice
is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class
of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: biome-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: environmentalFeature
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Environmental Feature
Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
characteristic of a biome. Recommended best practice is to use a
controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature
class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "meadow",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: environmentalFeature-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
Term Name: environmentalMaterial
Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial
Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
Label: Environmental Material
Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live. Recommended
best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
Comment: Examples: "scum",
"http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
further documentation here until the term is ratified)
Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
Refines:
Status: proposed
Date Issued: 2013-09-26
Date Modified: 2013-09-26
Has Domain:
Has Range:
Refines:
Version: environmentalMaterial-2013-09-26
Replaces:
IsReplaceBy:
Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
I hope this makes better sense.
Cheers,
John
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steve Baskauf
<steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
> Well, the proposal says "The Darwin Core term habitat would be
redefined..."
> . I take that to mean that the term dwc:habitat is being replaced with
> envo:00002036 . If that's not what it means, then it would be good to
> clarify. If the intention is to provide values for other terms, that
should
> be stated.
>
> Steve
>
>
> Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>
> I was assuming that the proposal was that subclasses of envo:habitat would
> take the place of values for the dwc:habitat property. But perhaps I was
> naive or misunderstanding?
>
> -hilmar
>
> Sent from away
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu>
> wrote:
>
> OK, now that I've had a chance to look at the RDF, it is as I suspected.
If
> I am understanding the proposal correctly, the proposal is to replace the
> term <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat> (i.e. dwc:habitat) with the
term
> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036> (which I'll call
> envo:00002036 for brevity) However, the definition of dwc:habitat which
you
> can view at
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwcterms.rdf
> says
>
> dwc:habitat rdf:type rdfs:Property
>
> whereas the document I received at the end of those four redirects tells
me
> that
>
> envo:00002036 rdf:type owl:Class
>
> Since
>
> owl:Class rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:Class
>
> then we are effectively changing the current DwC "habitat" term from a
> property into a class similar to dwc:Occurrence, dwc:Identification,
> dwc:Taxon, etc. which are all of type rdfs:Class.
>
> So I'm left wondering what I can do with the new term. With the old term
I
> could make a statement like
>
> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> dwc:habitat "deciduous
> forest"
>
> or something like that if I take the hint from the DwC class groupings
that
> dwc:habitat might be a property of dwc:Event instances. But I can't
> meaningfully say
>
> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> envo:00002036
> "deciduous forest"
>
> That doesn't make any sense because the way I understand RDF, predicates
> should be properties, not classes. Even if we weren't talking about RDF,
> I'd still have the same problem (we are changing a property into a class)
-
> it's just easier for me to make plain what the issue is by giving RDF
> examples. So just exactly what can I "do" with envo:00002036 ?????
>
> I haven't looked up the RDF for the other proposed terms (too much work
with
> the four redirects), but I suspect if I did, I'd find that they are also
> classes and not properties. This particular issue is a case of a broader
> issue that I have about OBO-style ontologies. They are great for defining
> how many, many kinds of classes are related to each other. But they
provide
> very few properties that could be used as predicates to serve as
properties
> of instance data.
>
> Steve
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> minimum 30-day comment period on the new environmental terms proposed
> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>
> The formal proposal would change the term habitat to align it with the
> ENVO habitat term. The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker
> is https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=178. The
> Darwin Core term habitat would be redefined as follows:
>
> Term Name: habitat
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Habitat
> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
> sustain an organism or a community of organisms.
> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> The formal proposal would add the following new terms for biome,
> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>
> Term Name: biome
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Biome
> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
> ecological succession and climax vegetation.
> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmental feature
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Environmental Feature
> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
> characteristic of a biome.
> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmental material
> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
> Label: Environmental Material
> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live.
> Comment: Examples: "scum",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=189
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=190
> and
> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=191
>
> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these terms,
> or comments about their definitions, please respond to this message.
> If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on any
> amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> the public commentary period.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> .
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
> --
> 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
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:51:13 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core environmental
terms from ENVO
To: Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdARDj32v9EPaofwHrzwonQ3czgwMaiyDmnj3c7L0tMnA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I've been in communication with the OBO-ENVO group
(obo-envo at lists.sourceforge.net) about the proposed re-use of the ENVO
terms. The ENVO ontology remains in active development, with a
proposed forthcoming guide on how to use ENVO. I have agreed to
forward an invitation extended by Pier Buttigieg to the TDWG community
to actively contribute.
"To be clear, the habitat class itself isn't queued for obsoletion, but its
current subclasses are. Once habitat is better-defined, new subclasses will
be created. If anyone in TDWG wishes to help shape the definition of this
concept or share any observations to promote its usefulness to the
biodiversity community we're certainly open to input."
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 2:44 PM, John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The spirit of the proposal is to satisfy use cases defined in the
> document "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" found at
> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424 by reusing terms from the ENVO
> ontology. Steve is correct. All of the ENVO terms are classes in
> keeping with the OBO Foundry way of doing things. As such, they don't
> work in the intended Darwin Core context as they currently stand,
> where what we want are properties whose values can come from ENVO as a
> controlled vocabulary in the way Hilmar described.
>
> To satisfy the spirit of the proposal, I suggest that instead of
> replacing the dwc:habitat property with the envo:habitat class and
> adding the other three ENVO classes, we modify the existing
> dwc:habitat property and introduce new properties whose ranges are
> recommended to be the appropriate ENVO classes, as follows:
>
> Retain the property term dwc:habitat, but amend the definition to be:
>
> Term Name: habitat
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Habitat
> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
> sustain an organism or a community of organisms. Recommended best
> practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
> habitat class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: habitat-2013-09-26
> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Add the following new property terms for biome,
> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>
> Term Name: biome
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/biome
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Biome
> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
> ecological succession and climax vegetation. Recommended best practice
> is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the biome class
> of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: biome-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmentalFeature
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalFeature
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Environmental Feature
> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
> characteristic of a biome. Recommended best practice is to use a
> controlled vocabulary such as defined by the environmental feature
> class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: environmentalFeature-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> Term Name: environmentalMaterial
> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/environmentalMaterial
> Namespace: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> Label: Environmental Material
> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live. Recommended
> best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as defined by the
> environmental feature class of the Environment Ontology (ENVO).
> Comment: Examples: "scum",
> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> Refines:
> Status: proposed
> Date Issued: 2013-09-26
> Date Modified: 2013-09-26
> Has Domain:
> Has Range:
> Refines:
> Version: environmentalMaterial-2013-09-26
> Replaces:
> IsReplaceBy:
> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>
> I hope this makes better sense.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steve Baskauf
> <steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu> wrote:
>> Well, the proposal says "The Darwin Core term habitat would be
redefined..."
>> . I take that to mean that the term dwc:habitat is being replaced with
>> envo:00002036 . If that's not what it means, then it would be good to
>> clarify. If the intention is to provide values for other terms, that
should
>> be stated.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>> Hilmar Lapp wrote:
>>
>> I was assuming that the proposal was that subclasses of envo:habitat
would
>> take the place of values for the dwc:habitat property. But perhaps I was
>> naive or misunderstanding?
>>
>> -hilmar
>>
>> Sent from away
>>
>> On Sep 25, 2013, at 8:23 PM, Steve Baskauf <steve.baskauf at vanderbilt.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> OK, now that I've had a chance to look at the RDF, it is as I suspected.
If
>> I am understanding the proposal correctly, the proposal is to replace the
>> term <http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/habitat> (i.e. dwc:habitat) with the
term
>> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036> (which I'll call
>> envo:00002036 for brevity) However, the definition of dwc:habitat which
you
>> can view at
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/source/browse/trunk/rdf/dwcterms.rdf
>> says
>>
>> dwc:habitat rdf:type rdfs:Property
>>
>> whereas the document I received at the end of those four redirects tells
me
>> that
>>
>> envo:00002036 rdf:type owl:Class
>>
>> Since
>>
>> owl:Class rdfs:subclassOf rdfs:Class
>>
>> then we are effectively changing the current DwC "habitat" term from a
>> property into a class similar to dwc:Occurrence, dwc:Identification,
>> dwc:Taxon, etc. which are all of type rdfs:Class.
>>
>> So I'm left wondering what I can do with the new term. With the old term
I
>> could make a statement like
>>
>> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> dwc:habitat
"deciduous
>> forest"
>>
>> or something like that if I take the hint from the DwC class groupings
that
>> dwc:habitat might be a property of dwc:Event instances. But I can't
>> meaningfully say
>>
>> <http://bioimages.vanderbilt.edu/baskauf/50750#eve> envo:00002036
>> "deciduous forest"
>>
>> That doesn't make any sense because the way I understand RDF, predicates
>> should be properties, not classes. Even if we weren't talking about RDF,
>> I'd still have the same problem (we are changing a property into a class)
-
>> it's just easier for me to make plain what the issue is by giving RDF
>> examples. So just exactly what can I "do" with envo:00002036 ?????
>>
>> I haven't looked up the RDF for the other proposed terms (too much work
with
>> the four redirects), but I suspect if I did, I'd find that they are also
>> classes and not properties. This particular issue is a case of a broader
>> issue that I have about OBO-style ontologies. They are great for
defining
>> how many, many kinds of classes are related to each other. But they
provide
>> very few properties that could be used as predicates to serve as
properties
>> of instance data.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> John Wieczorek wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on the new environmental terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would change the term habitat to align it with the
>> ENVO habitat term. The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker
>> is https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=178. The
>> Darwin Core term habitat would be redefined as follows:
>>
>> Term Name: habitat
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Habitat
>> Definition: A spatial region having environmental qualities which may
>> sustain an organism or a community of organisms.
>> Comment: Examples: "freshwater habitat",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002037". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2008-11-19
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002036
>> Replaces: habitat-2009-04-24
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms for biome,
>> environmental feature, and environmental material:
>>
>> Term Name: biome
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Biome
>> Definition: A major class of ecologically similar communities of
>> plants, animals, and other organisms. Biomes are defined based on
>> factors such as plant structures (such as trees, shrubs, and grasses),
>> leaf types (such as broadleaf and needleleaf), plant spacing (forest,
>> woodland, savanna), and other factors like climate. Unlike ecozones,
>> biomes are not defined by genetic, taxonomic, or historical
>> similarities. Biomes are often identified with particular patterns of
>> ecological succession and climax vegetation.
>> Comment: Examples: "flooded grassland biome",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_01000195". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000428
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: environmental feature
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Environmental Feature
>> Definition: A prominent or distinctive aspect, quality, or
>> characteristic of a biome.
>> Comment: Examples: "meadow",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00000108". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00002297
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: environmental material
>> Identifier: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
>> Namespace: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/
>> Label: Environmental Material
>> Definition: Material in or on which organisms may live.
>> Comment: Examples: "scum",
>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00003930". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Event (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified)
>> Type of Term: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Class
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2013-09-25
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/ENVO_00010483
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Event
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=189
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=190
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=191
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these terms,
>> or comments about their definitions, please respond to this message.
>> If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on any
>> amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 15:48:16 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern at gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGdrmyEAwZ-TcTxUqcdGemwc330_H51XUTo9abb0Mez8-g at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance, abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could
not share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To
understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make these
> terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out of records
> that can be compared with one another where sampling methods allow such
> comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for Abundance don't make
> this possible. Forcing normalisation into percentages seems an
unnecessary
> hurdle and risks encouraging the impression that number of ducks on a
> reservoir is somehow comparable with percentage dry mass, proportional
> expression of CO1 for a particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or
> whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field which
the
> data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is the most
> appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the sample. That
gives
> consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is in %
> of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l, ind./m^2,
ind/m^3,
> ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in the
> report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed during
>> the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 16:01:10 +0200
From: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern at gbif.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Cc: 'TDWG Content Mailing List' <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID: <01fd01cebac0$da9a8550$8fcf8ff0$@gbif.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Thanks, John.
You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
Simple Darwin Core.
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf Of John
Wieczorek
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc: aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of abundance,
abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the concepts
can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and
handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> the report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:37:15 -0600
From: Robert Guralnick <Robert.Guralnick at colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern at gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CADAgxGX=ZRknz2T-kd0e9wwwP72pSrtoeRVb175fm1EQQ7iovQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to be
honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
make sense given the class definition "The category of information
pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in a
dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and its
associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come from
a sample and a definition of extent.
It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
class within the Darwin Core?
Best, Rob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
<dhobern at gbif.org>wrote:
> Thanks, John.
>
> You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
> property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
> Simple Darwin Core.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> John
> Wieczorek
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> Cc: aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance,
> abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
>
> If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts
> can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
> following properties?
>
> measurementType
> measurementValue
> measurementAccuracy
> measurementUnit
> measurementDeterminedDate
> measurementDeterminedBy
> measurementMethod
> measurementRemarks
>
> The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
> share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why,
> see
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
> wrote:
> > Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> > these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> > of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> > methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> > Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> > percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> > impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> > with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> > particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
> >
> > I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> > which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> > the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> > sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret
and
> handle it.
> >
> > Donald
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> > Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> > Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> > Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> > [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> > Wever
> > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> > To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> > abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> > proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
> >
> > Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> > * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> > * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> > in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> > ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
> specific for %)?
> >
> > Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> > the report?
> >
> > Thanks for considering this question.
> >
> > With best regards,
> > Aaike
> >
> > John Wieczorek wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >>
> >> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> >> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> >> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> >> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> >> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
> >> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
> >>
> >> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
> >>
> >> Term Name: abundance
> >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
> >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >> Label: Abundance
> >> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
> >> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
> >> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
> >> can be used.
> >> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
> >> "24%". For discussion see
> >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >> Refines:
> >> Status: proposed
> >> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
> >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >> Has Domain:
> >> Has Range:
> >> Refines:
> >> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
> >> Replaces:
> >> IsReplaceBy:
> >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>
> >> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
> >> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
> >> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >> Label: Abundance as Percent
> >> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
> >> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
> >> sample.
> >> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
> >> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >> Refines:
> >> Status: proposed
> >> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
> >> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >> Has Domain:
> >> Has Range:
> >> Refines:
> >> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
> >> Replaces:
> >> IsReplaceBy:
> >> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>
> >> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
> >> and
> >> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
> >>
> >> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
> >> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
> >> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
> >> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> >> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> >> the public commentary period.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> tdwg-content mailing list
> >> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> >> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >
> > --
> > Aaike De Wever
> > BioFresh Science Officer
> > Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> > Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> > tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> > mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> > email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
> > skype: aaikew
> > LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> > BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> > <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> > Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20130926/443ee700/a
ttachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:57:45 +0000
From: Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: Robert Guralnick <Robert.Guralnick at colorado.edu>, "Donald Hobern
[GBIF]" <dhobern at gbif.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<059599138B8E5E4F9F90273125749230432CAAA2 at MBGMail02.mobot.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Although abundance is not "evidence of an occurrence in nature" it is
"information pertaining to evidence", isn't it?
Chuck
From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
[mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Robert Guralnick
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 9:37 AM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to be
honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
make sense given the class definition "The category of information
pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in a
dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and its
associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come from a
sample and a definition of extent.
It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
class within the Darwin Core?
Best, Rob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
<dhobern at gbif.org<mailto:dhobern at gbif.org>> wrote:
Thanks, John.
You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
Simple Darwin Core.
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org<mailto:dhobern at gbif.org>
Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
Tel: +45 3532 1471<tel:%2B45%203532%201471> Mob: +45 2875
1471<tel:%2B45%202875%201471> Fax: +45 2875 1480<tel:%2B45%202875%201480>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com<mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com>
[mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com<mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com>] On Behalf Of
John
Wieczorek
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc:
aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be<mailto:aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>;
TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of abundance,
abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the concepts
can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF]
<dhobern at gbif.org<mailto:dhobern at gbif.org>>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and
handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org<mailto:dhobern at gbif.org>
Global Biodiversity
> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471<tel:%2B45%203532%201471> Mob: +45 2875
1471<tel:%2B45%202875%201471> Fax: +45 2875 1480<tel:%2B45%202875%201480>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.o
rg>
>
[mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at list
s.tdwg.org>] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco at berkeley.edu<mailto:tuco at berkeley.edu>; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> the report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/>
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/<http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/>
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90<tel:%2B32%280%292%20627%2043%2090>
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93<tel:%2B32%280%29486%2028%2005%2093>
> email:
<aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be<mailto:aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
>
_______________________________________________
tdwg-content mailing list
tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org<mailto: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/20130926/56be25dd/a
ttachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 17:07:14 +0200
From: "Donald Hobern [GBIF]" <dhobern at gbif.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: "'Robert Guralnick'" <Robert.Guralnick at colorado.edu>
Cc: 'TDWG Content Mailing List' <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID: <024e01cebaca$15600ee0$40202ca0$@gbif.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Rob.
I understand your concern, but my concern is with the opportunities we are
currently missing to enable our occurrence mobilisation processes to offer
significantly more value in many contexts.
Some of the problem may be in the use of the word ?abundance?. If we
understand ?abundance? to refer to the size and density of a population or
species, then a survey may give us a workable measure we can use to
represent this. I am thinking of mobilisation of less ambitious
measurements of relative abundance of a taxon in any sampling event or set
of associated observations. I visit a reservoir and follow some standard
protocol and count 30 mallards and a single gadwall. Today that might be
exposed in simple Darwin Core as two occurrence records, each of which might
somehow include an individualCount. In the absence of any other
information, this count information cannot be seen as much more than an
anecdotal annotation. If we understood that these two observations were
part of a single survey event associated with a protocol also used for some
number of other survey events for which we have observations, we could (in
principle) find more ways to explore the significance of the count and use
it to help to fine-tune distribution models and to enhance them to indicate
patterns of abundance. If we can find a way to do this consistently for all
types of biodiversity observation (malaise traps, transects, expression of
ITS or CO1 from environmental samples), a large number of databases already
contributing to GBIF and other networks could immediately offer a richer
view to users and analysts.
I believe we could readily handle this with three properties that are
available for use with any occurrence ? a sampling event id, a sampling
protocol identifier (ideally a URL leading to information on the protocol)
and a relative abundance value within that sample. Any occurrence record
could include these fields if appropriate. Of course more normalisation is
possible, but DwC has never been about full normalisation.
We can debate which DwC classes ought to include support for such elements.
I personally think we?ve tied ourselves in unnecessary knots with our use of
Occurrences, Events, Material Samples, etc. I wish we just had an agreed
meta-model/ontology which provides a graph of classes of interest to our
domain (specimen, collection, taxon concept, taxon name, locality,
collector, etc.) and a set of uniquely named properties each of which is
associated with one of these classes or links instances of these classes.
Darwin Core should then allow for the denormalised representation of any
view corresponding to a subgraph of that model. Occurrence, Event, etc.
should then be names for popularly-used subgraphs and should represent the
logic for unpacking those denormalised DwC records back into a graph of
meta-model objects (in other words they should express something like what
SPARQL query might be able to extract this kind of record from data
organised using the meta-model/ontology).
Best wishes,
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - <mailto:dhobern at gbif.org> dhobern at gbif.org
Global Biodiversity Information Facility <http://www.gbif.org/>
http://www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: robgur at gmail.com [mailto:robgur at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Guralnick
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 4:37 PM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc: John Wieczorek; TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to be
honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
make sense given the class definition "The category of information
pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in a
dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and its
associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come from a
sample and a definition of extent.
It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
class within the Darwin Core?
Best, Rob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
wrote:
Thanks, John.
You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
Simple Darwin Core.
Donald
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
Tel: +45 3532 1471 <tel:%2B45%203532%201471> Mob: +45 2875 1471
<tel:%2B45%202875%201471> Fax: +45 2875 1480 <tel:%2B45%202875%201480>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf Of John
Wieczorek
Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
Cc: aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
abundanceAsPercent
Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of abundance,
abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the concepts
can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
(http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
following properties?
measurementType
measurementValue
measurementAccuracy
measurementUnit
measurementDeterminedDate
measurementDeterminedBy
measurementMethod
measurementRemarks
The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why, see
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
wrote:
> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>
> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and
handle it.
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 <tel:%2B45%203532%201471> Mob: +45 2875 1471
<tel:%2B45%202875%201471> Fax: +45 2875 1480 <tel:%2B45%202875%201480>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> Wever
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>
> Dear all,
>
> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>
> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
specific for %)?
>
> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> the report?
>
> Thanks for considering this question.
>
> With best regards,
> Aaike
>
> John Wieczorek wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>
>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>
>> Term Name: abundance
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance
>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>> can be used.
>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>> "24%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>> sample.
>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>> Refines:
>> Status: proposed
>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>> Has Domain:
>> Has Range:
>> Refines:
>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>> Replaces:
>> IsReplaceBy:
>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>
>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>> and
>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>
>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>> the public commentary period.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
> --
> Aaike De Wever
> BioFresh Science Officer
> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90 <tel:%2B32%280%292%20627%2043%2090>
> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93 <tel:%2B32%280%29486%2028%2005%2093>
> email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
> skype: aaikew
> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20130926/f10ab7c9/a
ttachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 17:04:51 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGevch5CNJzZwO2V-3g0KXvD6SW_B-O_iNsKDaYjEMy=RQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Not that is is propoer justification, but abundance was recommended to
be organized within Occurrence (no actual semantic link will be put
into existence with this proposal) simply because individualCount,
whose failings inspired the abundance term, was organized in
Occurrence.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
wrote:
> Although abundance is not ?evidence of an occurrence in nature? it is
> ?information pertaining to evidence?, isn?t it?
>
>
>
> Chuck
>
>
>
> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Robert Guralnick
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 9:37 AM
> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
>
>
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to be
> honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
> Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
> make sense given the class definition "The category of information
> pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in
a
> dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
> occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and its
> associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come from
a
> sample and a definition of extent.
>
>
>
> It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
> class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
> Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
> class within the Darwin Core?
>
>
>
> Best, Rob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks, John.
>
> You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
> property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
> Simple Darwin Core.
>
>
> Donald
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
John
> Wieczorek
> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> Cc: aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> abundanceAsPercent
>
> Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance,
> abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
>
> If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts
> can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
> following properties?
>
> measurementType
> measurementValue
> measurementAccuracy
> measurementUnit
> measurementDeterminedDate
> measurementDeterminedBy
> measurementMethod
> measurementRemarks
>
> The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
> share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why,
see
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
> wrote:
>> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
>> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
>> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
>> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
>> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
>> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
>> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
>> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
>> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>>
>> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
>> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
>> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
>> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret and
> handle it.
>>
>> Donald
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org Global Biodiversity
>> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
>> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
>> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
>> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
>> Wever
>> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
>> To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
>> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
>> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>>
>> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
>> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
>> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
>> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
>> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
> specific for %)?
>>
>> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
>> the report?
>>
>> Thanks for considering this question.
>>
>> With best regards,
>> Aaike
>>
>> John Wieczorek wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>>
>>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>>
>>> Term Name: abundance
>>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>>> Label: Abundance
>>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>>> can be used.
>>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>>> "24%". For discussion see
>>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>>> Refines:
>>> Status: proposed
>>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>>> Has Domain:
>>> Has Range:
>>> Refines:
>>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>>> Replaces:
>>> IsReplaceBy:
>>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>>
>>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>>> sample.
>>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>>> Refines:
>>> Status: proposed
>>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>>> Has Domain:
>>> Has Range:
>>> Refines:
>>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>>> Replaces:
>>> IsReplaceBy:
>>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>>
>>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>>> and
>>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>>
>>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>>> the public commentary period.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> John
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> tdwg-content mailing list
>>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
>> --
>> Aaike De Wever
>> BioFresh Science Officer
>> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
>> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
>> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
>> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
>> email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
>> skype: aaikew
>> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
>> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
>> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
>> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tdwg-content mailing list
> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 17:10:28 +0200
From: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CAHwKGGey+ga8htP5Xsqb+B2oKEeuCqSjPW-Vvt1UsiQZ7vhrJw at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
@Rob,
Do you think the ratification of a MaterialSample class (and the
associated property materialSampleID) would have any effect on the
viability or definition of an abundance term in Darwin Core?
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 5:04 PM, John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Not that is is propoer justification, but abundance was recommended to
> be organized within Occurrence (no actual semantic link will be put
> into existence with this proposal) simply because individualCount,
> whose failings inspired the abundance term, was organized in
> Occurrence.
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
wrote:
>> Although abundance is not ?evidence of an occurrence in nature? it is
>> ?information pertaining to evidence?, isn?t it?
>>
>>
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>>
>> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
>> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Robert
Guralnick
>> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 9:37 AM
>> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
>> Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
>>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
>> abundanceAsPercent
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to
be
>> honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the proposal.
>> Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if that
>> make sense given the class definition "The category of information
>> pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or in
a
>> dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
>> occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and
its
>> associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come
from a
>> sample and a definition of extent.
>>
>>
>>
>> It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the occurrence
>> class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
>> Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
>> class within the Darwin Core?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best, Rob
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks, John.
>>
>> You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly needed
>> property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
>> Simple Darwin Core.
>>
>>
>> Donald
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
>> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
>> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
>> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
John
>> Wieczorek
>> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
>> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
>> Cc: aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
>> abundanceAsPercent
>>
>> Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
abundance,
>> abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
>>
>> If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
concepts
>> can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
>> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
>> following properties?
>>
>> measurementType
>> measurementValue
>> measurementAccuracy
>> measurementUnit
>> measurementDeterminedDate
>> measurementDeterminedBy
>> measurementMethod
>> measurementRemarks
>>
>> The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could not
>> share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand why,
see
>> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org>
>> wrote:
>>> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
>>> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
>>> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
>>> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
>>> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
>>> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
>>> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
>>> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
>>> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
>>>
>>> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
>>> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
>>> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
>>> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret
and
>> handle it.
>>>
>>> Donald
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org Global Biodiversity
>>> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
>>> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
>>> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
>>> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
>>> Wever
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
>>> To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
>>> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
>>> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
>>>
>>> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
>>> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
>>> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
>>> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
>>> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
>> specific for %)?
>>>
>>> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
>>> the report?
>>>
>>> Thanks for considering this question.
>>>
>>> With best regards,
>>> Aaike
>>>
>>> John Wieczorek wrote:
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
>>>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
>>>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
>>>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
>>>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
>>>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
>>>>
>>>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
>>>>
>>>> Term Name: abundance
>>>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
>>>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>>>> Label: Abundance
>>>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
>>>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
>>>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
>>>> can be used.
>>>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
>>>> "24%". For discussion see
>>>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>>>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>>>> Refines:
>>>> Status: proposed
>>>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
>>>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>>>> Has Domain:
>>>> Has Range:
>>>> Refines:
>>>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
>>>> Replaces:
>>>> IsReplaceBy:
>>>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>>>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>>>
>>>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
>>>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
>>>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
>>>> Label: Abundance as Percent
>>>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
>>>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
>>>> sample.
>>>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
>>>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
>>>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
>>>> Refines:
>>>> Status: proposed
>>>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
>>>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
>>>> Has Domain:
>>>> Has Range:
>>>> Refines:
>>>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
>>>> Replaces:
>>>> IsReplaceBy:
>>>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
>>>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
>>>>
>>>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
>>>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
>>>> and
>>>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
>>>>
>>>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
>>>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
>>>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
>>>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
>>>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
>>>> the public commentary period.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> tdwg-content mailing list
>>>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>>>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>>
>>> --
>>> Aaike De Wever
>>> BioFresh Science Officer
>>> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
>>> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
>>> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
>>> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
>>> email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
>>> skype: aaikew
>>> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
>>> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
>>> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
>>> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tdwg-content mailing list
>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>>
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 09:22:38 -0600
From: Robert Guralnick <Robert.Guralnick at colorado.edu>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
abundance, abundanceAsPercent
To: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
Cc: Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>, TDWG Content Mailing List
<tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
Message-ID:
<CADAgxGUaErZ2QVmxmRzGJHisfy7-BGnqGs6U+5yma1+cRv0Z5Q at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
@Tuco, if one agrees that abundance is a property of a materialSample and
not an occurrence, yes. Donald's examples included "malaise traps,
transects, expression of ITS or CO1 from environmental samples" --- to me
those all represent sampling and samples. Yes we have event properties
that link events to occurrences. But the point is that if it were just
counts, fine. But its not. This is about counts over a specified area.
To me this is a very important point and this pushes us out of
"occurrence". Feel pretty strongly about it, actually.
@Donald, I resonate with Donald's perspective that what is needed is an
ontology where we can represent relationships between classes and
properties more effectively for graph traversal, and of course, there are
efforts currently being developed to do just that (e.g. the Biocollections
Ontology, where this would be a trivial use case).
Best, Rob
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:10 AM, John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> @Rob,
>
> Do you think the ratification of a MaterialSample class (and the
> associated property materialSampleID) would have any effect on the
> viability or definition of an abundance term in Darwin Core?
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 5:04 PM, John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> > Not that is is propoer justification, but abundance was recommended to
> > be organized within Occurrence (no actual semantic link will be put
> > into existence with this proposal) simply because individualCount,
> > whose failings inspired the abundance term, was organized in
> > Occurrence.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Chuck Miller <Chuck.Miller at mobot.org>
> wrote:
> >> Although abundance is not ?evidence of an occurrence in nature? it is
> >> ?information pertaining to evidence?, isn?t it?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Chuck
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> >> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Robert
> Guralnick
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 9:37 AM
> >> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> >> Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
> >>
> >>
> >> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> >> abundanceAsPercent
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree with Donald here regarding the need for Abundance, but am, to
> be
> >> honest, not quite I understand (or agree) with the logic of the
> proposal.
> >> Abundance is listed as a property of an occurrence, and I wonder if
that
> >> make sense given the class definition "The category of information
> >> pertaining to evidence of an occurrence in nature, in a collection, or
> in a
> >> dataset (specimen, observation, etc.)" Is abundance "evidence of an
> >> occurrence in nature". To me, abundance is a property of a survey and
> its
> >> associated methodology and is based on multiple occurrences that come
> from a
> >> sample and a definition of extent.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> It seems to me to be a bad fit to scrunch abundance into the
> occurrence
> >> class. I recognize that it might not quite fit anywhere in DwC yet.
> >> Wouldn't it be better to wait to see if materialSample is ratified as a
> >> class within the Darwin Core?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Best, Rob
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <dhobern at gbif.org
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Thanks, John.
> >>
> >> You are correct. I think though that abundance is such a commonly
> needed
> >> property that it would be a mistake not to make it work easily even in
> >> Simple Darwin Core.
> >>
> >>
> >> Donald
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org
> >> Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/
> >> GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> >> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>
> >> From: gtuco.btuco at gmail.com [mailto:gtuco.btuco at gmail.com] On Behalf
> Of John
> >> Wieczorek
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 3:48 PM
> >> To: Donald Hobern [GBIF]
> >> Cc: aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be; TDWG Content Mailing List
> >> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms - abundance,
> >> abundanceAsPercent
> >>
> >> Could every concept of abundance be captured in a combination of
> abundance,
> >> abundanceUnit, abundanceMethod?
> >>
> >> If so, is there justification for creating new terms at all if the
> concepts
> >> can be captured in MeasurentsOrFacts
> >> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#measureindex), which have the
> >> following properties?
> >>
> >> measurementType
> >> measurementValue
> >> measurementAccuracy
> >> measurementUnit
> >> measurementDeterminedDate
> >> measurementDeterminedBy
> >> measurementMethod
> >> measurementRemarks
> >>
> >> The only drawback I can see is that with MeasurementOrFacts you could
> not
> >> share the abunance information in Simple Darwin Core. To understand
> why, see
> >> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/simple/index.htm#rules.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Donald Hobern [GBIF] <
> dhobern at gbif.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Thanks - I think I too have missed something. If we want to make
> >>> these terms usable, there needs to be a simple way to get numbers out
> >>> of records that can be compared with one another where sampling
> >>> methods allow such comparisons. The suggested plain text examples for
> >>> Abundance don't make this possible. Forcing normalisation into
> >>> percentages seems an unnecessary hurdle and risks encouraging the
> >>> impression that number of ducks on a reservoir is somehow comparable
> >>> with percentage dry mass, proportional expression of CO1 for a
> >>> particular species in an ecogenomics sample, or whatever.
> >>>
> >>> I would much rather we ensured we had a standard, preferred field
> >>> which the data publisher can populate directly with whatever number is
> >>> the most appropriate expression of the relative abundance in the
> >>> sample. That gives consumers a clear expectation of how to interpret
> and
> >> handle it.
> >>>
> >>> Donald
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Donald Hobern - GBIF Director - dhobern at gbif.org Global Biodiversity
> >>> Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat,
> >>> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?, Denmark
> >>> Tel: +45 3532 1471 Mob: +45 2875 1471 Fax: +45 2875 1480
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> >>> [mailto:tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Aaike De
> >>> Wever
> >>> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:44 AM
> >>> To: tuco at berkeley.edu; TDWG Content Mailing List
> >>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Proposed new Darwin Core terms -
> >>> abundance, abundanceAsPercent
> >>>
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> >>> As somewhat of an outsider I have another question with regards to the
> >>> proposed terms abundance and abundanceAsPercent.
> >>>
> >>> Is there a specific reason for not adopting:
> >>> * the abundance field as a field to store only the value and
> >>> * a field abundanceUnit/abundanceType to specify whether the value is
> >>> in % of species, % of biovolume, % of biomass, individuals/l,
> >>> ind./m^2, ind/m^3, ind./sampling effort,...(instead of having a field
> >> specific for %)?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe this has been discussed during the hackathon and I missed it in
> >>> the report?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for considering this question.
> >>>
> >>> With best regards,
> >>> Aaike
> >>>
> >>> John Wieczorek wrote:
> >>>> Dear all,
> >>>>
> >>>> GBIF has just published "Meeting Report: GBIF hackathon-workshop on
> >>>> Darwin Core and sample data (22-24 May 2013)" at
> >>>> http://www.gbif.org/orc/?doc_id=5424. Now that this document is
> >>>> available for public reference, I would like to formally open the
> >>>> minimum 30-day comment period on two related new terms proposed
> >>>> during the workshop and defined in the referenced document.
> >>>>
> >>>> The formal proposal would add the following new terms:
> >>>>
> >>>> Term Name: abundance
> >>>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundance
> >>>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >>>> Label: Abundance
> >>>> Definition: The number of individuals of a taxon found in a sample.
> >>>> This is typically expressed as number per unit of area or volume. In
> >>>> the case of vegetation and colonial/encrusting species, percent cover
> >>>> can be used.
> >>>> Comment: Examples: "4 per square meter", "0.32 per cubic meter",
> >>>> "24%". For discussion see
> >>>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >>>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >>>> Refines:
> >>>> Status: proposed
> >>>> Date Issued: 2012-03-01
> >>>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >>>> Has Domain:
> >>>> Has Range:
> >>>> Refines:
> >>>> Version: abundance-2013-09-25
> >>>> Replaces:
> >>>> IsReplaceBy:
> >>>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >>>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>>>
> >>>> Term Name: abundanceAsPercent
> >>>> Identifier: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/abundanceAsPercent
> >>>> Namespace: http:/rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/
> >>>> Label: Abundance as Percent
> >>>> Definition: 100 times the number of individuals of a taxon found in a
> >>>> sample divided by the total number of individuals of all taxa in the
> >>>> sample.
> >>>> Comment: Examples: "2.4%". For discussion see
> >>>> http://code.google.com/p/darwincore/wiki/Occurrence (there will be no
> >>>> further documentation here until the term is ratified) Type of Term:
> >>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
> >>>> Refines:
> >>>> Status: proposed
> >>>> Date Issued: 2012-08-01
> >>>> Date Modified: 2013-09-25
> >>>> Has Domain:
> >>>> Has Range:
> >>>> Refines:
> >>>> Version: abundanceAsPercent-2013-09-25
> >>>> Replaces:
> >>>> IsReplaceBy:
> >>>> Class: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/Occurrence
> >>>> ABCD 2.0.6: not in ABCD (someone please confirm or deny this)
> >>>>
> >>>> The related issues in the Darwin Core issue tracker are
> >>>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=142
> >>>> and
> >>>> https://code.google.com/p/darwincore/issues/detail?id=187
> >>>>
> >>>> If there are any objections to the changes proposed for these new
> >>>> terms, or comments about their definitions, please respond to this
> >>>> message. If there are no objections or if consensus can be reached on
> >>>> any amendments put forward, the proposal will go before the Executive
> >>>> Committee for authorization to put these additions into effect after
> >>>> the public commentary period.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>> John
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> tdwg-content mailing list
> >>>> tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> >>>> http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Aaike De Wever
> >>> BioFresh Science Officer
> >>> Freshwater Laboratory, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences
> >>> Vautierstraat 29, 1000 Brussels Belgium
> >>> tel.: +32(0)2 627 43 90
> >>> mobile.: +32(0)486 28 05 93
> >>> email: <aaike.dewever at naturalsciences.be>
> >>> skype: aaikew
> >>> LinkedIn: <http://be.linkedin.com/in/aaikedewever>
> >>> BioFresh: <http://www.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/> and
> >>> <http://data.freshwaterbiodiversity.eu/>
> >>> Belgian Biodiversity Platform: <http://www.biodiversity.be>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20130926/a9bd35ee/a
ttachment.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
tdwg-content mailing list
tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
End of tdwg-content Digest, Vol 53, Issue 2
*******************************************
More information about the tdwg-content
mailing list