W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bioschemas@w3.org > June 2018

Re: [SUSPECTED SPAM] Re: Bioschemas.org to define biodiversity-related markup

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 


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.>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     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.>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:08:05 UTC