Inside SpecimenCircumscription/CircumscribedBy/@type an anonymous simple type enumeration exists with annotation: "May record the designated type-status of a specimen in relation to the circumscribed TaxonConcept, according to the nomenclatural codes".

Since the type status values are also needed in SDD, the SDD proposal has been moved into UBIF and should be merged with the TaxonConcept proposal. The UBIF list is generally more complete. Types also in UBIF.NomenclaturalTypeStatusOfUnitsEum: "epitype, holotype, isotype, lectotype, neotype, paratype, syntype, isosyntype, hapantotype, paralectotype, paratype, syntype, type"

The interesting additions not in UBIF are: "non-type" and "name-bearing type". Can you add semantic annotations to these two values?

Gregor Hagedorn -- 12. August 2004

We took the types directly from the codes - as documented (with definitions) on DraftStandardDocumentation see complementary documentation as word or pdf file.

non-types
specimens which are erroneously labelled as types should be annotated as, "Not a Type."
name-bearing type
The type genus, type species, holotype, lectotype, series of syntypes (which together constitute the name-bearing type) or neotype that provides the objective standard of reference whereby the application of the name of a nominal taxon can be determined.

As non-taxonomists we are probably not qualified to define this enumeration! and we agree it could be sensible to have a common standard list, although it is possible that not all 'types' would be relevant to all of the standard schemas. TrevorPaterson 12 Aug

I added a value for not-a-type to the UBIF enumeration. It would be helpful if reviewers of the taxon concept standard could also review the table in UBIF and perhaps compare this with the documentation in the Word file. Please take a look at the UBIF page (http://efgblade.cs.umb.edu/twiki/bin/view/UBIF/NomenclaturalTypeStatusOfUnitsEum) and add your comments there or here! Many thanks!

The definition of the name-bearing type seems to be inappropriately present in the enumeration. According to the definition it is a supertype of the value (any-) specimen-based-type and any-name-based-type.

Gregor Hagedorn -- 12. August 2004