- From: LJ.Garcia <lj.garcia.co@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:51:50 +0100
- To: Carl Boettiger <cboettig@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Gray, Alasdair J G" <A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk>, Franck Michel <franck.michel@cnrs.fr>, "public-bioschemas@w3.org" <public-bioschemas@w3.org>, robgur@gmail.com
- Message-ID: <CAPZUG=Dzpo+6gwNEAp=n-GzhNN53StDdxgOJY65JozWYcgfrdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi all, @Franck Michel <franck.michel@cnrs.fr> could you please pick up this two-identifier requirement raised by Carl? If needed, either ask Carl to create a GitHub issue or go ahead and do it yourself. Regards, On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:49 PM Carl Boettiger <cboettig@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks! > > Yes, identifiers are of course the solution, the point is that you need > two different identifiers and you need to know which is which. Here's a > quick DarwinCore example: > > { > > "taxonID": "ITIS:1000254", > > "scientificName": "Rollandia micropterum", > > "acceptedNameUsageID": "ITIS:562791", > > "taxonomicStatus": "synonym", > > "vernacularName": "Titicaca Grebe" > > } > > > > We don't need `taxonomicStatus` explicitly here, since it is implied by > seeing that the accepted ID (acceptedNameUsageID) is not the same thing as > the taxonID for this name. But we do need two identifiers, and we need to > know which one is which. It's not clear to me how the above would be > represented in the schema.org proposal. (of course one could say "don't > use synonyms! but we may as well then say "don't use scientific names, just > use accepted identifiers" but we live in a world that uses scientific names > so we need these mechanism that can acknowledge some names are synonyms) > > --- > Carl Boettiger > http://carlboettiger.info/ > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 9:58 AM LJ.Garcia <lj.garcia.co@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Carl, Franck, all, >> >> @Carl, Franck is probably the best person to point you to >> discussions/reasons regarding the property names. I am not much aware of >> how synonyms are handled in Darwin Core so my question could be naïve >> but... having different identifiers would not help there? Identifiers in >> Bioschemas should be FAIR, so, even if the label is the same, the >> identifier should tell you better, would not it? Regarding taxonomic >> concepts, again, Franck is the one that can answer better. >> @Franck, if necessary, further properties could be included at this point >> as the submission to schema.org still will take a bit. Also, if not done >> already, I would suggest to add examples per property so people understand >> better how to use them. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 5:18 PM Carl Boettiger <cboettig@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Alasdair, >>> >>> Thanks for the update and your work on this. In the spirit of >>> demonstrating adoption, I think it would be great if the recommendation >>> reflected greater alignment with existing namespaces that are widely used >>> in taxonomy, such as Darwin Core, https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#taxon . >>> >>> I think this would greatly facilitate adoption. For instance, the >>> current specification provides no mechanism to disambiguate synonyms ( >>> https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:taxonomicStatus, >>> https://dwc.tdwg.org/terms/#dwc:acceptedNameUsageID) or taxonomic >>> concepts. I'm also unclear on the utility of `childTaxon` and >>> `hasDefinedTerm` in the current bioschemas spec. Apologies if I've missed >>> the boat on these discussions already, but these are certainly barriers to >>> me in using bioschemas over an existing namespace like Darwin Core. (Also >>> cc'ing Rob Guralnick on this who has far more expertise than I in this area >>> and could speak more broadly to the potential for adoption of >>> https://bioschemas.org/types/Taxon/0.3-RELEASE-2019_11_18/) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Carl >>> >>> >>> >>> --- >>> Carl Boettiger >>> http://carlboettiger.info/ >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 4:04 AM Gray, Alasdair J G <A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Franck, >>>> >>>> Sorry for the slowness of my response, I have been off work for most of >>>> January and am now catching up with things. >>>> >>>> The status of getting things added to Schema.org is that we need to >>>> demonstrate usage of the deployed markup rather than just deployments of >>>> it. This is the focus of the latest ELIXIR sponsored project which will be >>>> aiming to demonstrate benefit of the markup within specific areas: rare >>>> disease, plants, intrinsically disordered proteins, and toxicology. This >>>> work will be running over the next 23 months. >>>> >>>> As such, we should not delay work on other types. So yes, we should >>>> progress the work on Taxon and TaxonName. >>>> >>>> The restructuring of the website that we conducted at the tail end of >>>> last year was motivated by making it clearer as to which profiles and types >>>> are released for general use and which are still under development. >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> >>>> Alasdair >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11 Feb 2020, at 17:04, LJ.Garcia <lj.garcia.co@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I am away this week so please allow me some extra days to have a look >>>> to this. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> On Saturday, February 8, 2020, Franck Michel <franck.michel@cnrs.fr> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear Alasdair and Leyla, >>>>> >>>>> I was wondering if you had time to check my last reply in issue 309 >>>>> <https://github.com/BioSchemas/specifications/issues/309#issuecomment-576247584>. >>>>> I was suggesting that, if endorsing of the Taxon term by schema.org >>>>> is still gonna take some time, what about trying to move directly to the >>>>> new couple (Taxon, TaxonName) that we have discussed since mid-2019. >>>>> >>>>> Any thoughts on this? >>>>> >>>>> Thx, >>>>> Franck. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Franck MICHEL - CNRS research engineer >>>>> Université Côte d’Azur, CNRS, Inria >>>>> I3S laboratory (UMR 7271) >>>>> franck.michel@cnrs.fr - +33 (0)4 8915 4277 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Alasdair J G Gray >>>> Associate Professor in Computer Science, >>>> School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences >>>> Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, UK. >>>> >>>> Email: A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk <A.J.G.Gray@hw.ac.uk> >>>> Web: http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~ajg33 >>>> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5711-4872 >>>> Office: Earl Mountbatten Building 1.39 >>>> Twitter: @gray_alasdair >>>> >>>> To arrange a meeting: http://doodle.com/ajggray >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> 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. 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 Friday, 14 February 2020 08:52:15 UTC