[tdwg-tag] dwcterms (was: Embedding specimen (and other) annotations in NeXML)

John R. WIECZOREK tuco at berkeley.edu
Wed Feb 25 02:15:24 CET 2009

Comments inline...

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Hilmar Lapp <hlapp at duke.edu> wrote:
> On Feb 23, 2009, at 6:33 PM, John R. WIECZOREK wrote:
>> [...]
>> Following what Dublin Core does with type vocabulary for dcterms:type,
>> the classes PreservedSpecimen, FossilSpecimen, LivingSpecimen, and
>> others are terms that act as the controlled vocabulary for
>> dwcterm:BasisOfRecord
> That's a good idea. But do they then need to be included in the dwcterms
> ontology? For someone looking at the dwcterms ontology in an ontology editor
> it's not obvious that this would be their intended use.

I have removed the type vocabulary from dwcterms.rdf and put it into
dwctype.rdf in the same folder. This fits with what Dublin Core does
as well, so good suggestion.

> As for the hierarchy, the problem I was trying to point out is that the
> PreservedSpecimen that is the super-property of FossilSpecimen is not the
> same PreservedSpecimen that is the sub-property of PhysicalObject, because
> they have different URIs
> (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/dwctype/PreservedSpecimen and
> http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/rdf/dwcterms.rdf#PreservedSpecimen, respectively).

I believe this is solved with the new arrangement of rdf schemas and
proper namespace usage.

>> [...] I have removed all references to the domain class 'none'.
> Indeed, thanks!
>> [...] The details of the relationship of Sample to other classes is left
>> to implementation as there is more than one reasonable viewpoint - a Sample
>> could be a property of a SamplingEvent
> BTW did you inadvertently delete the Sample property? I can't find it
> anymore, it's a class now. (But maybe that's what you intended?)

Sample was intended to be a Class. I believe it is correct now.

More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list