[tdwg-content] Fwd: [dwc] quantity (#12)

[Eamonn O Tuama [GBIF]]

Hi John,

The intent is to capture just one measurement (i.e.,
abundance/density/coverage - however the dataset is reporting quantitative
information on organism presence in a sampling event) - hence the proposal
to place the terms quantity and quantityType in the Occurrence class as
properties on an equal footing with individualCount, etc. By "buried", I
was just contrasting with the more generic properties of MeasurementOrFact
where you have to look up the value of measurementType to determine the
entity. In contrast, our quantityType (i.e., abundanceType) is more
direct. I can see that use of the word "quantity" can make quantityType
seem very generic but it was the best and most neutral one we came up with
to cover the various ways of reporting organism numbers in a sample.

Eamonn

> Hi Éamonn,
>
> Your reference to "buried" makes me curious. If you create the terms
> quantity and quantityType, they could appear as two "columns" in a Simple
> Darwin Core record. That is, they could accommodate only one type of
> measurement per record. To do other than that the terms would have to go
> into an extension, where they would be exactly as "buried" as they would
> if
> you used measurementOrFact. Am I missing something?
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Éamonn Ó Tuama [GBIF]
> <eotuama at gbif.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> Simon's distinction of scaled number vs discrete set could probably be
>> captured using DWC MeasurementOrFact properties. However, as discussed
>> previously, we felt that because measurements of
>> abundance/density/coverage
>> were of fundamental importance in field studies, and in the spirit of
>> DwC's
>> pragmatic approach, they merited their own high level term(s), rather
>> than
>> "burying" them under MeasurementOrFact - hence the proposal of
>> "quantity"
>> and "quantityType" where the term "quantity" seems the most inclusive
>> label
>> for what we are trying to express.
>>
>> Following John's recommendation, we have removed the references to
>> examples in the definitions and expanded the examples in the comment
>> section so it is clear how they are to be used.
>>
>> quantity
>>
>> #Definition
>> A number or enumeration value for the entity being quantified in
>> quantityType.
>> #Comment
>> The terms quantity and quantityType are required to be used as a pair.
>> The
>> value of quantity is a number or enumeration, e.g.,  “27” for a
>> quantityType “individuals”, “12.5” for a quantityType
>> “%biomass”, or “r”
>> for a quantityType “BraunBlanquetScale”.
>>
>>
>> quantityType
>>
>> #Definition
>> The entity to which the number or enumeration reported in quantity
>> refers.
>> #Comment
>> The terms quantity and quantityType are required to be used as a pair.
>> The
>> value of quantityType (i.e., the entity being measured) is expected to
>> be
>> drawn from a small controlled vocabulary with terms such as
>> “Individuals”,
>> “%Biomass”, “%Biovolume”, “%Species”, “%Coverage”,
>> “BraunBlanquetScale”,
>> “DominScale”. Examples when combined with quantity values: + on
>> DominScale;
>> 5 on BraunBlanquetScale; 45 for %Biomass.
>>
>> Éamonn
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org [mailto:
>> tdwg-content-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Markus Döring
>> Sent: 15 December 2014 15:48
>> To: Paul J. Morris
>> Cc: TDWG Content Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Fwd: [dwc] quantity (#12)
>>
>> "r" is a value for very few individuals in the Braun Blanquet cover
>> abundance scale which is used a lot in vegetation studies. It is like
>> various others a non continous scale with discrete values. I do not
>> think
>> we should restrict quantity to contious numeric scales.
>>
>> Markus
>>
>>
>>
>> > Am 15.12.2014 um 15:36 schrieb Paul J. Morris <mole at morris.net>:
>> >
>> > Markus can probably answer this question:
>> >
>> > What would be the expected value of QuantityType for a Quantity of
>> "r"?
>> >
>> > A comment Bob Morris occasionally makes is: "1 is greater than 2 for
>> > sufficently large values of 1".  If some particular quantity type has
>> > a standard set of codes that represent numbers, then it might be
>> > appropriate to use those standard codes as values of quantity.
>> >
>> > -Paul
>> >
>> > On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 12:48:06 +0100
>> > John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Der all,
>> >>
>> >> I am forwarding this comment from Simon Cox, which was submitted to
>> >> the Darwin Core development site on Github.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >>
>> >> John
>> >>
>> >> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >> From: Simon Cox <notifications at github.com>
>> >> Date: Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 4:47 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: [dwc] quantity (#12)
>> >> To: tdwg/dwc <dwc at noreply.github.com>
>> >> Cc: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 'quantity' usually implies an amount, encoded as a scaled number.
>> >> In most other domains it does not include a value from an enumerated
>> >> set. The latter may be called 'quality'.
>> >> Both quantity and quality are subclasses of 'property'.
>> >>
>> >> —
>> >> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
>> >> <https://github.com/tdwg/dwc/issues/12#issuecomment-66946784>.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Paul J. Morris
>> > Biodiversity Informatics Manager
>> > Harvard University Herbaria/Museum of Comparative Zoölogy
>> > mole at morris.net  AA3SD  PGP public key available
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > tdwg-content mailing list
>> > tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
>> > http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>