Topic 3: GUIDs for Taxon Names and Taxon Concepts - Maybe ...
J.Kennedy at NAPIER.AC.UK
Fri Nov 4 14:18:08 CET 2005
You definitely should be in bed!!! but not because of your input -
amazes me how you manage to keep as clear as you do given the time ....
> I did not mean to insinuate that *all* usages should be thought of as
> concepts. Like you said -- for another discussion elsewhere.
> > I agree with Sally that we should have Nomenclators provide GUIDs
> Taxon_Names but
> > would be more strict and say that these names should have only one
> and that the GUID
> > should always resolve to exactly the same name. So IPNI would be
> names, Index
> > fugorum fungi names, zoobank when available animal names etc. and
> > share the resource of fixing this rather than duplicating effort (if
> > resource to give;-) ) IPNI and IF wouldn't overlap in names.
> This is congruent with my thinking. But are you comfortable with
> different nomenclators having different definitions of a "name"? Might
> it hard to pool cross-nomenclator data.
I'd prefer they used the same definitions of a name for exchanging data
but don't especially mind how they represent it in their system....but
that might cause other problems....
This message is intended for the addressee(s) only and should not be read, copied or disclosed to anyone else outwith the University without the permission of the sender.
It is your responsibility to ensure that this message and any attachments are scanned for viruses or other defects. Napier University does not accept liability for any loss
or damage which may result from this email or any attachment, or for errors or omissions arising after it was sent. Email is not a secure medium. Email entering the
University's system is subject to routine monitoring and filtering by the University.
More information about the tdwg-tag