Root element of the data set.
Information associated with the creation of the dataset in human-readable form. [M]
- result of GBIF1
- purpose is to give humans a chance to identify datasets.
Person or Program that generated the data set.
Time at which the data set was created.
Reason why the data set was generated.
Origin of the data for derived data sets (e.g. database connect string).
Container for taxonomic names
- only if available in original datasource
Various Name related info ... to be specified.
A non-unique handle to the concept. [A]
- names can be of various types (scientific, ad-hoc label, common)
- there can only be one name for a concept
- to relate names one must relate concepts
Complete name as found in the data source. [M]
- if only an atomised form of an scientific name is available in the source data set, it has to be calculated.
Atomized data items of the scientific name. [M]
- only if available in original datasource
- complete implies scientific
Information about the author of the concept using the name in his sense. [M]
- alternative element names are: Secundum, Sensu
Kingdom of the concept. [M]
- do we really need to store this? Only place I can see this being required is when selecting NameDetailed.
Rank of the concept. [M]
- should be identical to the rank of the name, but is repeated to emphasise the concept point of view
Stores explicit, non- nomenclature and nomenclature relationships. [M]
- used to be called TaxonSynonymyRelationship
A set of specimens that are used to define the concept.
A set of taxonomic concepts at one rank lower in the same classification hierarchy that define a taxonomic concept. [A]
- parent and child concepts must come from one single classification and hence have the same author
- complete if source data set is a revision or if explicitly stated in s.d.s.
- incomplete if only a subset of a hierarchy is recorded (e.g. geographical list)
A set of character description elements are used to define this concept. [M]
- it is unlikely that in the foreseeable fute any data set will provide us with this info - so it is not defined further.
- potential place where sdd schema can be stored
Unformatted data associated with the data set. [M]
- specific GBIF request
Container for voucher (representation of specimen) records.
Specimen and location [A]
A word or phrase describing the type of specimen collected.
Information about the curator or contact person and/or agency responsible for the specimens.
Container for publication recoords.
Details of the data source where the the concept was originally published. [A]
Full bibliographic reference as a single formatetd string.
Reference broken down into individual components. [M]
One option is to include the reference part from EML, but I think the complexety is unnecessary and likely to introduce conversion problems. I am more in favour of a flat endnote style approach. The current version is based on R.Pyles's tbl_references, which in turn is based on endnote 7.
Reference to an entity defined elsewhere (equivalent to a foreign key)
Abreviation of the Author team as used in the data source. [?]
- would it be useful to allow for different abreviations here ? IMO it should only be the one used in the source data set
More details.
Who was responsible for creating a particular concept. [M?]
- might be a subset of the authors of the publicatio below (neccessary?)
- do we need to store more details about authors? and if so which?
Time of the concept creation in available precision.
Publication in which the concept was introduced. [M]
- can be either an internal reference or a GUID
Specifies a location (e.g. paragraph) within the publication