[tdwg-content] Darwin Core Proposal - term content recommendations to comments

Thu Feb 5 17:17:58 CET 2015

I like the idea in principle.  Would it be subject to the conventions
of the RDF Guide? That is, would it be explicitly declared as taking a
literal object and be accompanied by an IRI version
dwcattributes:exampleIRI? Would this require adding to the scope of
the Guide? (Is the scope of the Guide sufficient for the current
enterprise in general?)

The proposals to use skos:example are appealing on several grounds.
But  skos:note and its subproperties (including skos:example) can take
literals or references [1].  To me, that weighs   more than the
baggage of minting two new terms.

Bob

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#notes

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Markus Döring <m.doering at mac.com> wrote:
> I like that idea, John!
>
> On 05 Feb 2015, at 15:30, John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> We have been musing about how to make it easy to mark up examples in
> human-readable renditions, and how best to enable that in the RDF as source.
> I think, Ramona, that the separate example usage annotations solve multiple
> real problems that we have right now and align us well with how we would
> like to manage Darwin Core in BCO. Thus, though it may not be necessary for
> Darwin Core at this time, I think it will actually help us.
>
> Thus, I would like to formally amend the original proposal. Specifically, I
> would add a new attribute dwcattributes:example. I would add an instance of
> this attribute for every example in every Darwin Core term. All examples
> would be removed from the definitions and comments. The recommendations on
> controlled vocabularies would still be moved consistently to the comments as
> in the original proposal.
>
> Given this proposed amendment, I'll change the end-date for commentary on
> this proposal to 5 Mar 2015.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Ramona Walls <rlwalls2008 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> This is a good idea. In theory the recommendation could go into a separate
>> annotation (e.g., we use "example of usage" in BCO), but I don't think that
>> is necessary for DwC at this juncture.
>>
>> Ramona
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> Ramona L. Walls, Ph.D.
>> Scientific Analyst, The iPlant Collaborative, University of Arizona
>> Research Associate, Bio5 Institute, University of Arizona
>> Laboratory Research Associate, New York Botanical Garden
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:00 AM, <tdwg-content-request at lists.tdwg.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>> than "Re: Contents of tdwg-content digest..."
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 1
>>> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 14:58:06 +0100
>>> From: John Wieczorek <tuco at berkeley.edu>
>>> Subject: [tdwg-content] Darwin Core Proposal - term content
>>>         recommendations to comments
>>> To: TDWG Content Mailing List <tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org>
>>> Message-ID:
>>>
>>> <CAHwKGGc7sK3Dg8KTN_NYe4S+OYk=YE+-dRxjKPS-dNnGhAvjMw at mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> During the process of reviewing the recent set of changes to the Darwin
>>> Core standard in early November 2014, it was proposed to make the
>>> definitions and comments for terms more consistent in their treatment of
>>> content recommendations. The specific proposal is logged in the Darwin
>>> Core
>>> issue tracker as https://github.com/tdwg/dwc/issues/26.
>>>
>>> The gist of the proposal is that recommendations on how to populate a
>>> term
>>> are often in the definition whereas we would like them to be consistently
>>> in the comments section. The list of affected terms is given below for
>>> reference.
>>>
>>> This message is to elicit responses from any who might have a reason to
>>> recommend against these changes, which are not semantic in nature. We
>>> will
>>> leave this proposal open for commentary until 19 February 2015 unless
>>> further discussion arises resulting in amendments.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>> The following terms have recommendations in the definitions, which we
>>> would
>>> like to move to comments:
>>>
>>> datasetID
>>> occurrenceID
>>> sex
>>> lifeStage
>>> reproductiveCondition
>>> behavior
>>> establishmentMeans
>>> occurrenceStatus
>>> organismID
>>> organismScope
>>> materialSampleID
>>> eventID
>>> eventDate
>>> eventTime
>>> locationID
>>> higherGeographyID
>>> continent
>>> waterBody
>>> islandGroup
>>> island
>>> country
>>> countryCode
>>> municipality
>>> locality
>>> minimumDistanceAboveSurfaceInMeters
>>> maximumDistanceAboveSurfaceInMeters
>>> locationAccordingTo
>>> decimalLatitude
>>> decimalLongitude
>>> geodeticDatum
>>> coordinateUncertaintyInMeters
>>> pointRadiusSpatialFit
>>> verbatimCoordinates
>>> verbatimLatitude
>>> verbatimLongitude
>>> verbatimCoordinateSystem
>>> verbatimSRS
>>> footprintWKT
>>> footprintSRS
>>> footprintSpatialFit
>>> georeferencedDate
>>> georeferenceVerificationStatus
>>> geologicalContextID
>>> identificationID
>>> dateIdentified
>>> identificationVerificationStatus
>>> taxonID
>>> scientificName
>>> subgenus
>>> taxonRank
>>> nomenclaturalCode
>>> taxonomicStatus
>>> measurementID
>>> measurementType
>>> measurementUnit
>>> measurementDeterminedDate
>>> relationshipOfResource
>>> relationshipEstablishedDate
>>>
>>> while the following terms already have the recommendations in the
>>> comments:
>>>
>>> institutionID
>>> collectionID
>>> basisOfRecord
>>> dynamicProperties
>>> recordedBy
>>> preparations
>>> disposition
>>> associatedMedia
>>> associatedReferences
>>> associatedSequences
>>> associatedTaxa
>>> otherCatalogNumbers
>>> associatedOccurrences
>>> associatedOrganisms
>>> previousIdentifications
>>> higherGeography
>>> georeferencedBy
>>> georeferenceSources
>>> typeStatus
>>> identifiedBy
>>> identificationReferences
>>> higherClassification
>>> measurementDeterminedBy
>>> -------------- next part --------------
>>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>> URL:
>>> http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-content/attachments/20150119/38ca5b70/attachment-0001.html
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

-- 
Robert A. Morris

Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
UMASS-Boston
100 Morrissey Blvd
Boston, MA 02125-3390

Filtered Push Project
Harvard University Herbaria
Harvard University

email: morris.bob at gmail.com
web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
web: http://wiki.filteredpush.org
       http://wiki.datakurator.net
       http://taxonconceptexplorer.org/
http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram