[tdwg-content] Wrapping up public comment on 204 - 226
jsachs at csee.umbc.edu
Wed Oct 15 23:02:20 CEST 2014
The following is a summary of the comments received since announcing the
proposals encapsulated in Issues 204 - 226 . Comment came in two forms
- posts to tdwg-content, and comments in the Darwin Core Issue Tracker
. Only one issue attracted comment on tdwg-content, and five issues
attracted (mostly clarifying) comments in the Tracker. (This is
encouraging, since the proposals were the result of a years-long consensus
The issue that was the subject of discussion on this list was Issue 205,
the proposal to add a dwc:Organism class. The first comment came from Rob
Guralnick, who did not see the need for this new class . In reply,
Steve Baskauf pointed out that we already have an Organism class, implied
by the existing term dwc:individualID, and that the proposal simply
describes what kinds of things could reasonably have their identifier be
the value of dwc:individualID. There was concurrence with Steve from Rich
Pyle and Bob Morris, with no further comment.
The other comments on this issue were related to my suggestion  that
the proposal be amended to i) remove the reference to OBI in our
definition, and ii) to give the new class an opaque identifier. In regards
(i), Rich, Bob, and Steve were in favour, and Hilmar opposed. In regards
(ii), Bob was in favour, while Rich and Hilmar were initially opposed.
After some conversation, however, it seemed acceptable to them that the
term be given an opaque identifier, with organism as the label. Eamonn
also seemed on board with an opaque identifier.
Meanwhile, the Issue Tracker saw the following:
Issue 204, the umbrella Issue for all the changes
Bob wondered how we might notify those whose DwC Archives would be
affected by the proposed changes. Steve and Markus argued that existing
DwCAs would not be affected, for reasons they explain in their comments
Issue 211, dwc:NomenclaturalChecklist
JohnW pointed out that dwctype:NomenclaturalChecklist was to be replaced
by dwctype:Nomen, which suggests that the correct label for the new term
Issue 212, dwc:Occurrence
I suggested expanding the definition of occurrence to include
non-organismal things like genes, rocks, and metagenomic samples. For
reasons I explain in my comment, I dont think we need to do this now.
Issue 214, dwc:Event
Some clarifying remarks from Bob and Steve.
Issue 222, organismID
Clarification from Steve (and an indication of support from Bob).
Issue 226, AssociatedOrganisms
Some questions from Bob, answered by Steve.
If I have mischaracterized anything above, please let me know.
More information about the tdwg-content