- From: Franck Michel <franck.michel@cnrs.fr>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 23:47:28 +0200
- To: LJ Garcia Castro <ljgarcia@ebi.ac.uk>, "Gray, Alasdair J G" <A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk>, Ricardo Arcila <arcila@ebi.ac.uk>
- Cc: "public-bioschemas@w3.org" <public-bioschemas@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <a5bb36c6-0170-d3b3-3515-92b157d5ab9c@cnrs.fr>
Hi all, It seems like I've had email issues lately. I just discovered Ricardo's and Alasdair's answers in the flow below. Also, I thought I had submitted a pull request for the creation of a _groups/Biodiversity.md file that I had carefully written, but it never reached out to Ricardo (and I can't find any trace of it on Gihub ;)). Anyway, my idea was to create a Biodiversity group (instead of a Taxon group), whose first task would be to define the Taxon profile. There may be other profiles defined by this group later on. Are you ok with that? @Leyla: as a starting point, maybe we can interact through the discussion document I associated with the mapping (in the Taxon folder <https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1Fp2AKbb07So7rVvUhnQIjpl8HLPSwpbP>)? Franck. Le 20/06/2018 à 19:49, LJ Garcia Castro a écrit : > > Hi Franck, > > We associate proteins to taxa so I am happy to help. Please add me to > the loop and let us know what would be the best approach to > contribute, i.e., email, comments via gdrive, issues via github, etc. > > Regards, > > > On 15/06/2018 13:10, Gray, Alasdair J G wrote: >> Hi All >> >> I’m happy for the taxon group to be created with Franck as the >> initial group lead. Is there someone willing to support Franck in >> this role? >> >> Alasdair >> >>> On 15 Jun 2018, at 12:58, Ricardo Arcila <arcila@ebi.ac.uk >>> <mailto:arcila@ebi.ac.uk>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello Franck, >>> >>> I have taken the liberty to create a branch >>> <https://github.com/BioSchemas/bioschemas.github.io/tree/ric/feat/taxons-group> with >>> the draft of the group Taxons, please feel free to adjust it as you >>> see fit. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Ricardo >>> >>>> On 12 Jun 2018, at 10:02, Franck Michel <franck.michel@cnrs.fr >>>> <mailto:franck.michel@cnrs.fr>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Ricardo and Leyla, >>>> >>>> I just made a pull request, and I created a Biodiversity >>>> specification folder on Google drive. Let me know if anything is >>>> not right. I've set myself as the group leader, but I would feel >>>> more comfortable if someone of the community would join me in this >>>> role. And obviously, you are most welcome to join the group! >>>> >>>> > will be Taxon a BioChemEntity? I am asking because in UniProt we >>>> have proteins link to what is defined as an "unknown" taxon in NCBI >>>> taxonomy/UniProt taxonmy. I guess, even if iwe have this "unknown" >>>> case, we could still use BiochemEntity and suppose any "unknow" >>>> will be eventually resolve to an actual entity. Happy to chat about it. >>>> I agree, the large definition of BioChemEntity makes it appropriate >>>> as the root of Taxon. So far, I think of Taxon as a profile more >>>> than a type of its own. I'll read the wiki and start drafting >>>> something. I let you know if (most probably when) I have any >>>> question. ;) >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Franck. >>>> >>>> Le 11/06/2018 à 15:46, LJ Garcia Castro a écrit : >>>>> >>>>> Hello Franck, >>>>> >>>>> The taxon profile has been mentioned as one we need before but >>>>> there was no group for it. Wonderful you are starting one now! >>>>> Please ask whenever you have a doubt about the process or the >>>>> different approaches (third-party vocabs or additionalProperty) to >>>>> deal with properties not covered by BioChemEntity. >>>>> >>>>> By the way, will be Taxon a BioChemEntity? I am asking because in >>>>> UniProt we have proteins link to what is defined as an "unknown" >>>>> taxon in NCBI taxonomy/UniProt taxonmy. I guess, even if iwe have >>>>> this "unknown" case, we could still use BiochemEntity and suppose >>>>> any "unknow" will be eventually resolve to an actual entity. Happy >>>>> to chat about it. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11/06/2018 14:39, Ricardo Arcila wrote: >>>>>> Hello Franck, >>>>>> >>>>>> It is a good idea to start by creating the group. You can do it >>>>>> by creating a pull request on the bioschemas groups repository >>>>>> <https://github.com/BioSchemas/bioschemas.github.io/tree/master/_groups>. >>>>>> Then you can add yourself on the people repository >>>>>> <https://github.com/BioSchemas/bioschemas.github.io/tree/master/_people>. >>>>>> I will be happy to help you in this process and if you'd like I >>>>>> could be part of the group as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> In order to start a draft specification for Taxon you should >>>>>> create a folder with the profile name on the specifications drive >>>>>> folder >>>>>> <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0Bw_p-HKWUjHoNThZOWNKbGhOODg?usp=sharing>. >>>>>> This process its detailed on the bioschemas github wiki >>>>>> <https://github.com/BioSchemas/specifications/wiki/Bioschemas-Specification-Process>. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please let me know if you have any question or doubt about the >>>>>> process, I will be most happy to help. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Ricardo Arcila >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 9:54 AM Franck Michel >>>>>> <franck.michel@cnrs.fr <mailto:franck.michel@cnrs.fr>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm catching up with the discussions on the list, and I'm >>>>>> happy to see that things are moving on with the submission of >>>>>> new types to schema.org <http://schema.org/>. >>>>>> >>>>>> At the same time, I realize that we did not really go ahead >>>>>> about the biodiversity topic. As I will present a poster >>>>>> about Bioschemas.org <http://bioschemas.org/> at the >>>>>> Biodiversity Information Standard in August, that would maybe >>>>>> be a good thing to initiate the work on this by this date. >>>>>> How do we go on? I suggested the creation of a a Taxon >>>>>> profile, but we may have to start with the creation of a group? >>>>>> Could you please guide me/us in this process? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thx, >>>>>> Franck. >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 23/01/2018 à 11:09, Leyla Garcia a écrit : >>>>>>> Hello Bioschemas governance team, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do you think about going ahead with the Biodiversity >>>>>>> schemas? Do we have a heads up? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> @Franck, I am not really aware of those organizations but I >>>>>>> am happy to guide you through the work we have done for >>>>>>> Bioschemas so far. I worked a bit on a biodiversity project >>>>>>> but that was some years ago. Still, I like the subject! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let's wait to see what Carole, Rafael and Alasdair suggest. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23/01/2018 08:47, Franck Michel wrote: >>>>>>>> Dear Leyla and all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I understand that your response stands for a GO. Right? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I've not been involved yet in the specification of the >>>>>>>> Bioschemas.org <http://bioschemas.org/> profiles. So >>>>>>>> indeed, I shall need help and guidance as to how things are >>>>>>>> going on, the tools, the process, the expected outcomes, etc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> As I proposed, we could start with contacting people that >>>>>>>> would potentially be interested in taking part into this. >>>>>>>> I'm thinking about Encyclopedia of Life, Catalogue of Life, >>>>>>>> GBIF. If you already know contacts in these organizations, >>>>>>>> that would certainly be helpful. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Franck. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Le 22/01/2018 à 11:37, Leyla Garcia a écrit : >>>>>>>>> Hi Franck, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Great news! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do you need any help/guides for the start-up? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 17/01/2018 15:24, Franck Michel wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm following up on this suggestion about creating a >>>>>>>>>> biodiversity-related group in Bioschemas.org >>>>>>>>>> <http://bioschemas.org/>. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The proposition received four +1's. I'm not sure if there >>>>>>>>>> is a "minimum score" to attest of sufficient consensus. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As we discussed, if we go for the creation of this group, >>>>>>>>>> it would be beneficial to involve at least EoL folks, >>>>>>>>>> possibly other people from the biodiversity community. I >>>>>>>>>> can try to initiate this, yet before I would like to have >>>>>>>>>> an official GO from our community. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let me know how this usually works, and what you think >>>>>>>>>> about this. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> Franck. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Le 17/11/2017 à 16:40, Franck Michel a écrit : >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Mélanie, hi all, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> To go a bit further I've tried to somewhat extend the >>>>>>>>>>> example I've initiated. There it is: >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/frmichel/taxref-ld/tree/master/bioschemas-org >>>>>>>>>>> The README gives details as to how the example file is >>>>>>>>>>> organized, and more importantly it lists some of the >>>>>>>>>>> issues and questions that we shall have to tackle if we >>>>>>>>>>> officially start the group. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> @Alasdair, Carole, Rafael: as discussed in the thread, >>>>>>>>>>> at some point it shall be beneficial to to invite people >>>>>>>>>>> from EoL and TDWG. Is there some sort of "official" >>>>>>>>>>> channel for the community to do that? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Have a nice week-end, >>>>>>>>>>> Franck. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Le 17/11/2017 à 10:19, Melanie Courtot a écrit : >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Frank, all, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 16/11/2017 09:37, Franck Michel wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Meanie, hi all, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> EoL provides an API that returns species descriptions >>>>>>>>>>>>> as JSON-LD based on schemas.org <http://schemas.org/>. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Beluga example: http://eol.org/api/traits/328541 >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is unclear who consumes this data, but at least, as >>>>>>>>>>>>> you already saw, they embed it at the end of their own >>>>>>>>>>>>> web pages such as http://eol.org/pages/328541/data. >>>>>>>>>>>> BioSamples does the same - an API to retrieve JSON and >>>>>>>>>>>> we embed it in our webpages for crawler as well. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As you also noticed, the JSON-LD they provide is not >>>>>>>>>>>>> valid. I didn't know about that EOL Github issue, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> I recently discussed it with Rod Page from the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Biodiversity Information Standards (aka TDWG), who >>>>>>>>>>>>> replied on the Github issue. The Google structured >>>>>>>>>>>>> data testing tool gives more details on that: >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://frama.link/xJm0AAto >>>>>>>>>>>>> Besides, other errors are not reported (well, I think >>>>>>>>>>>>> these are errors): property scienfiticName without any >>>>>>>>>>>>> namespace is invalid, that should be >>>>>>>>>>>>> dwc:scientificName since this does not exist in >>>>>>>>>>>>> schema.org <http://schema.org/>. Same issue for >>>>>>>>>>>>> vernacularName, traits, units... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> But whatever, this JSON-LD has lots of issues, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> it's a start. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. Only mentioned the tweaks in case someone wanted >>>>>>>>>>>> to give it a try as well. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The assumption is that there is some sort of specific >>>>>>>>>>>>> (one-to-one) agreement between EoL and Google, and >>>>>>>>>>>>> that Google harvests this data despite the invalid >>>>>>>>>>>>> JSON-LD. But I have no confirmation of that >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It'd be interesting to clarify this. It seems a little >>>>>>>>>>>> bit counter intuitive that EoL would mark their pages >>>>>>>>>>>> up with JSON for Google to read it but then Google >>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't do so without a special adapter? We're >>>>>>>>>>>> probably missing a piece of the story. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> > - the measurement type points to >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/VT_0001256, which is >>>>>>>>>>>>> body length. The schema.org/predicate >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://schema.org/predicate> value is also "body >>>>>>>>>>>>> length (VT)". How is this understood and displayed as >>>>>>>>>>>>> Length on the Google result? >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Similar question for the actual value and units, >>>>>>>>>>>>> which are "4249.83" and "mm" respectively. Is Google >>>>>>>>>>>>> doing some sort of unit conversion/roundup for display? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Good question. Typically about the unit "mm": >>>>>>>>>>>>> - "units": "mm" => there is no such thing as >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://schema.org/units >>>>>>>>>>>>> - "dwc:measurementUnit": >>>>>>>>>>>>> "http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UO_0000016" >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UO_0000016> => this >>>>>>>>>>>>> seems to be the only reliable property, but then >>>>>>>>>>>>> Google knows the Darwin Core vocabulary and interprets it. >>>>>>>>>>>>> My assumption is that Google performs some treatment >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the values. Possibly, they developed a specific >>>>>>>>>>>>> connector to cope with EoL JSON-LD and translate this >>>>>>>>>>>>> body size to "4.2 m". >>>>>>>>>>>>> Besides, the snippet mentions "4.2 m *(Adult)*", so >>>>>>>>>>>>> they also presumably consider this property: >>>>>>>>>>>>> eol:traitUri"http://eol.org/resources/704/measurements/adultheadbodylen27" >>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://eol.org/resources/704/measurements/adultheadbodylen27> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to know that this is the size of an adult. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> With proper Bioschemas.org <http://bioschemas.org/> >>>>>>>>>>>>> profiles, I think we could annotate pages from many >>>>>>>>>>>>> other institutions, such as the Beluga page >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://inpn.mnhn.fr/espece/cd_nom/60932?lg%3Den> on >>>>>>>>>>>>> the french National Museum of Natural History, and in >>>>>>>>>>>>> turn, enable search engines to harvest data from >>>>>>>>>>>>> complimentary pages and produce mashups of related >>>>>>>>>>>>> pages, etc. >>>>>>>>>>>> That sounds like a great idea and entirely within the >>>>>>>>>>>> scope of Bioschemas. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> At this point, I think we should involve people from >>>>>>>>>>>>> EoL, and from the TDWG community (Rod Page would >>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly be of great added value in this respect). >>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? Is there a procedure for inviting >>>>>>>>>>>>> people "officially"? >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we could benefit from their experience indeed; >>>>>>>>>>>> it seems they were able to deploy markup, add >>>>>>>>>>>> additional properties and then get this to be >>>>>>>>>>>> interpreted by Google which seems to match our use case >>>>>>>>>>>> pretty well! >>>>>>>>>>>> I +1'd the issue at >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/BioSchemas/specifications/issues/115 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>> Melanie >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Franck. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 15/11/2017 à 17:57, Melanie Courtot a écrit : >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Frank, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This looks really interesting, thanks for bringing it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> up. I was trying to find out how the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>> between EoL and schema.org <http://schema.org/> was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> working and am wondering if you (or someone else!) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> could shed some light on this? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you suggested in the below, I checked the google >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beluga >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.google.fr/search?dcr=0&ei=ml74WajPMMzWUabjqvAF&q=beluga&oq=beluga&gs_l=psy-ab.3...19519.20929.0.20945.6.3.0.0.0.0.93.93.1.1.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..5.1.92...0j0i131k1.0.AGNziTItYzc> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> search result and do see the line "Length: 4.2 m >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Adult) Encyclopedia of Life" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If I try to find where that info comes from, and head >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to EoL, I can reach the page >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://eol.org/pages/328541/overview, and follow the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "see all traits" link to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://eol.org/pages/328541/data which contains the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> JSON-LD. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I trimmed it down to extract the relevant bit, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated the id to be a string as per >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/EOL/tramea/issues/352, and pasted >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it in the JSON playground mostly to make sure it was >>>>>>>>>>>>>> working as expected: http://tinyurl.com/yadam6nj >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am missing the link of how the following happens: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - the measurement type points to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/VT_0001256, which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> body length. The schema.org/predicate >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://schema.org/predicate> value is also "body >>>>>>>>>>>>>> length (VT)". How is this understood and displayed as >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Length on the Google result? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Similar question for the actual value and units, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which are "4249.83" and "mm" respectively. Is Google >>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing some sort of unit conversion/roundup for display? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Trophic level on EoL is "carnivore", but Google >>>>>>>>>>>>>> displays "Carnivorous" >>>>>>>>>>>>>> etc >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or am I looking at the wrong source for the markup? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Melanie >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/11/2017 15:17, Franck Michel wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just joined the Bioschemas.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://bioschemas.org/> community following some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussions I had with Alasdair Gray whom I met at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ISWC in Vienna, and I'd like to start a new >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion thread. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, just to start, a few words about me. I'm a CNRS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> research engineer, I work at the I3S laboratory in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> France, in particular with the Wimmics research team >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> led by Fabien Gandon. I'm currently involved in some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> activities related to the publication of taxonomic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information as Linked Data [1]. In this context, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've met the Biodiversity Information Standards >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community (TDWG) that is increasingly considering SW >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> standards, LD publication and web pages markup. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a domain where, I think, it would be relevant for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bioschemas.org <http://bioschemas.org/>to get involved. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There exist lots of web portals reporting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> observations, traits and other data about all sorts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of living organisms. Encyclopedia of Life >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://eol.org/> (EoL) and the Global Biodiversity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Information Facility <https://www.gbif.org/> (GBIF) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are some of the most well known. Markup questions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are actively considered in this field, for instance >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EoL web pages embed schemas.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://schemas.org/>-based JSON-LD descriptions >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that Google leverages to enrich their snippets: e.g. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if you google beluga >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.google.fr/search?dcr=0&ei=ml74WajPMMzWUabjqvAF&q=beluga&oq=beluga&gs_l=psy-ab.3...19519.20929.0.20945.6.3.0.0.0.0.93.93.1.1.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..5.1.92...0j0i131k1.0.AGNziTItYzc> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you shall see 'Encyclopedia of Life' mentions in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snippet providing average weight and size data. For >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now, this seems to be an "individual" initiative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between EoL and Google/schemas.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://schemas.org/>, but it would make sense if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this was part of a broader reflection led by >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bioschemas.org <http://bioschemas.org/>. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My opinion is that fostering the use of common >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> markup by these portals could be very effective in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> helping the biodiversity community to discover >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information and figure out new data integration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scenarios.Within Bioschemas.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://bioschemas.org/>, we could define profiles >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to account for biodiversity-related >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information.Taxonomic registers are used as the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> backbone of many web portals, apps and databases >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> related to biodiversity, agronomy and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agriculture.For instance, EoL and GBIF both rely on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Catalog of Life >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <http://www.catalogueoflife.org/> taxonomy. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, we could start with the definition of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> profile to describe a taxon and the related >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scientific and vernacular names thereof. Then, this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could be extended with the representation of traits >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (characteristics of biological organisms), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> observations, occurrence data, conservation status >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (e.g. endangered) etc. There already exist >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vocabularies for such data such as the well-adopted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Darwin Core terms. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As a quick example, consider the web page describing >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the common dolphin on the web site of the french >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Museum of Natural History: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://inpn.mnhn.fr/espece/cd_nom/60878?lg=en. This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> page could come with a JSON-LD desciption looking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like this: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/frmichel/taxref-ld/blob/master/bioschemas-org-example.json >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This example is naive and very succinct, and there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are lots of things to discuss and decide. Besides, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just registered on the mailing yesterday, so it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may not fit with good practices that you guys have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> already agreed upon. Sorry if this is the case. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nevertheless, my point is basically to bootstrap the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion and see if the community is willing to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> endorse this initiative. If this is the case, we >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should probably involve people from the biodiversity >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community: Darwin Core experts, EoL/GBIF >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> representatives etc. But that will come in time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I look forward to further discussions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Franck. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] Michel F., Gargominy O., Tercerie S. & >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Faron-Zucker C. (2017). A Model to Represent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nomenclatural and Taxonomic Information as Linked >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Data. Application to the French Taxonomic Register, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TAXREF. In Proceedings of the 2nd International >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Workshop on Semantics for Biodiversity (S4BioDiv) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> co-located with ISWC 2017 vol. 1933. Vienna, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Austria. CEUR. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Franck MICHEL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CNRS research engineer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +33 (0)492 96 5004 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> franck.michel@cnrs.fr <mailto:franck.michel@cnrs.fr> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Université Côte d’Azur, CNRS, *Inria* - I3S - UMR 7271 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 930 route des Colles - Bât. Les Templiers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BP 145 - 06903 Sophia Antipolis CEDEX - France >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tel. +33 (0)4 9294 2680 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <tel:+33%204%2092%2094%2026%2080>, Fax : +33 (0)4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 9294 2898 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Franck MICHEL >>>>>> CNRS research engineer >>>>>> +33 (0)4 8915 4277 >>>>>> franck.michel@cnrs.fr <mailto:franck.michel@cnrs.fr> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Université Côte d’Azur, CNRS- I3S - UMR 7271 >>>>>> 930 route des Colles >>>>>> <https://maps.google.com/?q=930+route+des+Colles&entry=gmail&source=g> >>>>>> - Bât. Les Templiers >>>>>> BP 145 - 06903 Sophia Antipolis CEDEX - France >>>>>> Tel. +33 (0)4 9294 2680 <tel:+33%204%2092%2094%2026%2080> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> Alasdair J G Gray >> >> Fellow of the Higher Education Academy >> Assistant Professor in Computer Science, >> School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences >> (Athena SWAN Bronze Award) >> Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh UK. >> >> Email: A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk <mailto:A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk> >> Web: http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~ajg33 <http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/%7Eajg33> >> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5711-4872 >> Office: Earl Mountbatten Building 1.39 >> Twitter: @gray_alasdair >> >> Untitled Document >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> */Heriot-Watt University is The Times & The Sunday Times >> International University of the Year 2018/* >> >> Founded in 1821, Heriot-Watt is a leader in ideas and solutions. With >> campuses and students across the entire globe we span the world, >> delivering innovation and educational excellence in business, >> engineering, design and the physical, social and life sciences. >> >> This email is generated from the Heriot-Watt University Group, which >> includes: >> >> 1. Heriot-Watt University, a Scottish charity registered under >> number SC000278 >> 2. Edinburgh Business School a Charity Registered in Scotland, >> SC026900. Edinburgh Business School is a company limited by >> guarantee, registered in Scotland with registered number SC173556 >> and registered office at Heriot-Watt University Finance Office, >> Riccarton, Currie, Midlothian, EH14 4AS >> 3. Heriot- Watt Services Limited (Oriam), Scotland's national >> performance centre for sport. Heriot-Watt Services Limited is a >> private limited company registered is Scotland with registered >> number SC271030 and registered office at Research & Enterprise >> Services Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS. >> >> The contents (including any attachments) are confidential. If you are >> not the intended recipient of this e-mail, any disclosure, copying, >> distribution or use of its contents is strictly prohibited, and you >> should please notify the sender immediately and then delete it >> (including any attachments) from your system. >> >
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2018 21:48:04 UTC