How to use TaxonConcept.

I have two cases in my mind:

  1. I recorded name usages rather than taxon concept in my DB. It shoul contain not only new taxon conepts but also re-use of them. Should I scrutinise prior to map to TCS? I don't have sufficient time to examine them so if scrutinsation is prerequisite, I can't use TCS.
  2. I'd like to use TCS to echange scrutinised concept data. Can I assume that data through TCS is sufficiently scrutinised because it captures TaxonConcept?

What are answers to these questions from "users"?

-- JamesYtow 21 Aug. 2004

Reply from TrevorPaterson 01 September

I don't really understand what you mean by 'scrutinize'. I think that we would generally consider what you call 'name-usages' as new concepts, and would suggest that you mapped a name usage to a concept. I dont think that you can ever assume anyone elses data is sufficiently scrutinised, you can choose to trust it or not - if you know their data model and how that has been mapped to TCS it is up to you to decide if you like their data....

--- A NameUsage is unnecessary a new concept (in ordinary sense). It may be re-use of the concept by the same author in later publication, or by other authors in other publications including field guides. I understand that TCS discourages to put such re-use to avoid concept data inflation, so I thought data provider should filter out these discouraged data prior to talk to other databases via TCS. This filtration process requires to examine each data source because e.g. a field guide may contain new concept. I expressed this process as 'scrutinise' since it requires taxonomists' hard work. If it is schema of NameUsage, then we do not need to mind such filtration. -- JamesYtow 02-Sep.-2004

I dont know what sort of data provider has this Name Usage data.....If someone has this sort of data lets try representing it in the schema. -- TrevorPaterson 03 Septemeber