Root element of the data set.

 Information associated with the creation of the dataset
							in human-readable form.

A summary of the metadata for this
									document.

 A place holder for an external schema giving
										details of the metadata for this document. A meta data
										schema is provided with the TCS release for this purpose
										should no other schema be prefered. 

Container for vouchers (representation of specimen)
							records.

Specimen and location

Information about the location of
												  the specimen. The PlaceholderType represents a
												  placeholder for optionally extending the schema
												  with a schema element defined in another
												  standard. 

The PlaceholderType represents a
												  placeholder for optionally extending the schema
												  with a schema element defined in another
												  standard.

Physical object the voucher is
												  referring to. The PlaceholderType represents a
												  placeholder for optionally extending the schema
												  with a schema element defined in another
												  standard.

Container for publication records.

Details of the data source.

Full bibliographic reference as a
												  single formatted string.

Mechanism to allow for the
												  extension of the schema for specific
												  applications.

 A container element for NameObjects. 

 An object that represents a single scientific
										biological name that either is, or appears to be,
										governed by one of the biological codes of nomenclature.
										These are not taxa. Taxa, whether accepted or not, are
										represented by TaxonConcept objects. Vernacular names are
										also dealt with under taxon concepts. 

Container for TaxonConcept records.

 Representation of a TaxonConcept. Various
										types of concept can be represented, including a reference
										to the GUID of an existing Concept. 

A non-unique handle to the
												  concept. This can represent the name as published.

 The taxonomic rank of this
												  concept. Either as a string or as a code for a
												  recognise rank or both. 

Information about the authorship
												  of this concept which uses the Name in their
												  sense (i.e. secundum, sensu).

Stores explicit, taxonomic and
												  nomenclatural relationships that are part of the
												  original concept definition.

Type of the
												  relationship 

Reference
												  to another
												  TaxonConcept.
												  

A set of specimens that are used
												  to define the concept.

Link to record of a
												  specimen. 

A set of taxonomic descriptions
												  used to define this concept. May potentially
												  hold descriptions according to the TDWG SDD
												  schema, or any other, format.

Mechanism to allow for the
												  extension of the schema for specific
												  applications.

Container for taxonomic assertion
						records.

Relationships between two concepts which are
										not part of the original definition of either of these
										concepts; possibly by a third party.  

Information about the
												  authorship of the asserted
												  relationship.

Starting point of the
												  directed relationship. A reference to a
												  TaxonConcept.

End point of the directed
												  relationship. A reference to a
												  TaxonConcept.

Describes the origin of the concept or assertion.

Unstructured string as used in the data source describing the
						origin of the concept (e.g. AuthorTeam and year).

Details provided by the data source about the concept or
						relationship authors.

This field should contain the authors of the
									concept.
									Note that the Simple sub element of this element is a signature
									field and should have the following content.
									For TCS signatures two situations are envisaged, one
									where concepts appear in printed publications and the other
									where concepts are published on-line. When representing a
									printed concept the field should contain the unabbreviated
									surnames of the authors in the order they appear in the
									publication separated by spaces. Initials and any punctuation
									marks should be omitted. If there are more than three authors
									only the first two author names should be included and they
									should be followed by the words “et al”. The full authorship of
									the concept will always be available via the
									<PublishedIn> element. Transliteration of names
									should be avoided unless they can't be represented in UTF-8
									encoding. If the concept is being published on line, and does
									not exist in a paper form, then the DNS name of the institution
									publishing the concept should be used. A policy should be
									formulated for how many sub-domains should be cited and this
									should be stuck to. It is recommended that the “www” sub-domain
									should not be used (e.g. ipni.org not www.ipni.org). These DNS
									names are not expected to resolve to anything now or in future
									and so artificial sub-domains could be created to represent
									publishing authorities within larger organisation if required.
									If the concept is version sensitive then the DNS name should be
									followed by a space and then the versioning information.
								

Reference ID or GUID of the original publication
									in which the concept or relationship was introduced.
								

 This is an additional qualification to the
									reference given by 'PublishedIn'. It for holding things such as
									"page 34" or "tab. 67" etc. 

A collection (seq) of name strings, used for
				publication authors or editors and for collectors, i. e. whenever the identity of an
				Agent is doubtful and can not associated with an Agent without
			doubt

Authors or Editors expressed only as string,
						e.g. in publications where the identity of creators can often not be
						discovered. Optionally, the ref attribute may refer to an agent if the
						relation between string and Agent can be assessed.

The full code-appropriate author team string for this name at
						this rank. If author is not known, enter the literal "-" (element is not
						optional!). Examples: 'L.'; '(L.) Smith & Jones ex Brown, Green
						& Black'. Where atomized citation data exist, this text should be
						derived from them.

 This represents the authors of the basionym. It is
								usually displayed in brackets. 

 This represents the authors of the new combination of
								this name. The authors who come after the brackets in the
								traditional way of citing botanical names. These authors are not
								usually cited in zoology though the ICZN recommends that they should
								be included (Art.51G). 

 A label containing the canonical name without authors. For
						the purposes of a TCS signature this field should contain nothing but the
						text strings representing the name itself with no indication of rank or any
						other qualifiers. 

Family, genus, infrafamilial or suprafamilial
						name

 The name of the genus. If this name is below the rank
								of genus then this may also be reference to a NameObject that
								contains the name of the genus. 

 The specific epithet for the name. If this is
										subspecific taxon then this may be a link to another
										NameObject that contains the species. 

 The name of the Cultivar, Cultivar Group, grex, convar or
						graft chimera. Under the ICNCP. Just include here the string of the name.
						i.e. ommit the single quotes around cultivar names, the word Group that
						denotes cultivar group and the + sign used in chimeras. These symbols can be
						added in later on the basis of the rank of the name. The user of Group for
						example is language dependant. 

A list of authors with a year if required.

Taxonomic authors. The "ex" and ":" used in botanical
					names should be treated as special author names. Note that document order is important here!

 A base object that defines a common structure for a number of
				elements within NameObject. 

The article/note/recommendation in the code in question that
						is commented on below

 Comment concerning this name. 

 If status is conservation, the rejected name and vice versa,
						if illegitmate because homonym the earlier homonym, etc. 

 The publication/reference source used to determine the
						nomenclatural status. 

 Specifies any minor reference parts connected to the
						According to publication e.g. page number 

Placeholder for other schema standards

 Elements of this type are used to refer to other resources. They can
				be used in the following ways. 1) With text content and no attributes - a simple
				text representation of the resource. 2) With no text content but a ref attribute
				pointing to the location or the resource. 3) A combination of the two above. The
				text content is a summary or the resource referenced to in the ref attribute.
			

Type attribute describe the type of relationship

 A full (non-atomized) name, including nomenclatural
						citation (authors/year in the form mandated by the relevant code). The name
						should be normalized (removing optional infrageneric or infraspecific
						hierarchy, author given only for the lowest nomenclatural rank) human
						readable and unique representation of the nomenclatoral name object. Where
						available, this should be generated from the canonical name and authorship
						plus Name extensions. In combination with the ID this constitutes the lowest
						abstraction a of name. Any other information is optional.
					

 The taxonomic rank of this name. Either as a string or as a
						code for a recognise rank or both. The code attribute is a TCS signature
						field. 

Canonical name enforcing strict inclusion of only
						nomenclatural information - _not_ taxonomic information with the exception
						of the necessary placements within Genus or Species. 

Authorship of the name, optionally
					atomized

 A link to where this name was first published.
					

 The year of publication of the name as it would appear in the
						publication. This is the publication year for THIS name combination not for
						the basionym should this be a comb nov. This is a TCS signature field.
					

 Specifies any minor reference parts connected to the name
						publication e.g. page number 

										A container for type specimens and other vouchers.
									

Names at species and below are typified by
											 specimens.

 A reference to a type
												  specimen for this name. 

 A reference to the
												  publication where the lectotype was
												  nominated. 

 Specifies any minor reference
												  parts connected to the lectotypification
												  publication e.g. page number
												  

Names above species level are typified by the
										NAME of a lower taxon.

 A reference to the name object
												  that typifies this name. e.g. species for genus
												  or genus for family etc. 

 A reference to the publication
												  where the lectotypes were nominated.
												

 Specifies any minor reference
												  parts connected to the lectotypification
												  publication e.g. page number 

The current name is a spelling correction of the name that is
						pointed to.
					

 The current name is a recombination (comb nov) of the name
						pointed to and the name pointed to is not, itself, a recombination.
					

The current name is the validation of a that was not fully
						published before. Covers the use of ex in botanical author strings. ICBN
						Art. 46.4: e.g. if this name object represents G. tomentosum Nutt. ex Seem.
						then the pointer should point to G. tomentosum Nutt. 

 The current name is conserved against the name pointed to.
						ICBN: Conservation is covered under Article 14 and Appendix II and Appendix
						III (this name is nomina conservanda). ICZN: Conservation is covered under
						Article 23.9 (this name is nomen protectum and the target name is nomen
						oblitum) 

 Current name has same spelling as target name but was
						published later and has priority over it (unless conserved or sanctioned).
						See ICBN: Article 53, ICZN: Chapter 12, Article 52. 

 With reference to fungi. ICBN: Articles 13.1d and 15. ICZN:
						No equivelent term for animals

 Current name is replacement for target name.
						Also called 'replacement name' or 'avowed substitute' ICBN: Article 7.3
						ICZN: Article 60.3.
					

 Note concerning the publication status of the
						name. e.g. whether it is validly published. THIS SHOULD NOT BE USED TO IMPLY
						WHETHER THE NAME IS CONSIDERED TO REPRESENT AN ACCEPTED TAXON. An accepted
						taxon can only be represented as a TaxonConcept. 

Mechanism to allow for the extension of the schema for
						specific applications.

Taxonomic ranks can be represented as either a plain text
			string in the body of the element or an attribute from a controlled vocabulary. It is highly
				recommended that the attribute is used where ever possible.
			

Enumeration of the nomenclatural code under which a
				name is considered valid. (Source: comparison of enumerations in ABCD 1.49 and
				initial LinneanCore.)

<p>This list is a first version of a constrained vocabulary to express typifying
					relations between taxonomic names and units (specimens or objects preserved in
					collections). Beyond those type categories explicitly governed by nomenclatural
					codes (Zoology, Botany, Bacterioloy, Virology), the list also includes some
					additional type status terms. These categories may be helpful when interpreting
					the original circumscription (topotypes, ex-types), but do not have the same
					binding status as terms governed by the nomenclatural codes. The enumeration
					attempts to strike a balance between listing all possible terms, and remaining
					comprehensible. In general, including too many terms was considered less
					problematic than omitting terms. Applications may easily select a subset for
					presentation in their user interface.</p>
<p>This list is intended as a first version and it is hoped that in the review
					process through TDWG it will achieve sufficient maturity to be truly useful. It
					is expected that over time revisions will have to be made. Please use the WIKI
					(http://efgblade.cs.umb.edu/twiki/bin/view/UBIF/NomenclaturalTypeStatusOfUnitsDiscussion)
					to discuss the current list and the lists of synonymous, doubtful, or excluded
					type terms provided therein.</p>
<p>Some background information: A type provides the objective standard of reference
					to determine the application of a taxon name. The type status of a unit
					(specimen) is only meaningful in combination with the name that is being
					typified (a unit may have been designated type for multiple names in different
					publications). The type status of an object may be designated in the original
					description of a scientific name (original designation), or - under rules layed
					out in the respective nomenclatural codes - at a later time (subsequent
					designation). -- For taxa above species rank the type is always a lower rank
					taxon (e. g., species for genus, genus for family). The type terms for this
					situation are not included in the enumeration. Ultimately, typication of all
					taxa goes back to physical type units, but this should not be recorded as such
					in data sets. The indirect type reference in higher taxa means that typification
					changes to the lower taxon automatically affect the higher taxon.</p>
<p>The exact definitions of type status differ between nomenclatural codes (ICBN,
					ICZN, ICNP/ICNB, etc.). The term definitions are intended to be informative and
					generally applicable across the different codes. The should not be interpreted
					as authoritative; in nomenclatural work the exact definitions in the respective
					codes have to be consulted. A duplication of status codes (bot-holo, zoo-holo,
					bact-holo, etc.) is not considered desirable or necessary. Since the application
					of the type status terms is constrained by the relationship of the typified name
					with a specific code, the exact definition can always be unambiguously
					retrieved.</p>
<p>The following publications have been consulted to determine the number of type
					terms that should be included and to prepare the semantic definitions:</p>
<ul>
	<li>Nomenclatural Glossary for Zoology (January 18 2000;
						ftp://ftp.york.biosis.org/sysgloss.txt; verified 17. June 2004)</li>
	<li>ICBN St. Louis Code
						(http://www.bgbm.fu-berlin.de/iapt/nomenclature/code/SaintLouis/0013Ch2Sec2a009.htm;
						verified 17. June 2004)</li>
	<li>Draft BioCode 4th version (Greuter et al., 1997;
						http://www.rom.on.ca/biodiversity/biocode/biocode1997.html)</li>
	<li>Glossary of 'type' terminology (Ronald H. Petersen;
						http://fp.bio.utk.edu/mycology/Nomenclature/nom-type.htm)</li>
	<li>Dictionary of Ichthyology (Brian W. Coad and Don E. McAllister, 2004;
						http://www.briancoad.com/Dictionary/introduction.htm)</li>
	<li>A useful resource that was not available when writing this proposal might
						be: Hawksworth, D.L., W.G. Chaloner, O. Krauss, J. McNeill, M.A. Mayo, D.H.
						Nicolson, P.H.A. Sneath, R.P. Trehane and P.K. Tubbs. 1994. A draft Glossary
						of terms used in Bionomenclature. (IUBS Monogr. 9) International Union of
						Biological Sciences, Paris. 74 pp.</li>
</ul>
<p>Many thanks for review and help to Dr. Miguel A. Alonso-Zarazaga and Dr. Walter
					Gams. Gregor Hagedorn, 13.7.2004</p>

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode
				"suprafamilial". This rank group includes all ranks higher than superfamily (class,
				phylum/division, kingdom, domain)

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode
				"infra-subspecfic", i.e. below the species group

Subset of ranks used spefically for cultivated
			plants

<p>Enumerated codes to express the rank of a taxon (scientific organism name) in a
					taxonomic hierarchy. The list is intended to be interoperable between name
					providers for bacteria, viruses, fungi, plants, and animals. It is not assumed
					that in each taxonomic group all ranks have to be used. Individual applications
					may select appropriate subsets (which may be based on information given inside
					the enumerated values, see Specifications/BioCode-, Botany-, Zoology-, and
					BacteriaStatus). The enumeration attempts to strike a balance between listing
					all possible rank terms, and remaining comprehensible. For example, the "infra-"
					ranks specifically mentioned in BioCode have been included (although very rarely
					used), but the additional intermediate zoological ranks (micro, nano, pico,
					etc.) are not included. Whether the selection of infraspecific ranks (some
					informal ranks, esp. from bacteriology, may be missing!) probably needs some
					discussion. However, it is believed that this list may help to start developing
					data sets that can easily be integrated across the barriers of Language and
					taxonomic traditions.</p>
<p>Not included in the list are the botanical "notho-" ranks, which are used to
					designate hybrids (nothospecies, nothogenus). It is assumed they can be
					generated from separate information that the taxon is a hybrid. ICBN §4.4
					states: "The subordinate ranks of nothotaxa are the same as the subordinate
					ranks of non-hybrid taxa, except that nothogenus is the highest rank permitted".</p>
<p>The following publications have been consulted to determine the number of type
					terms that should be included and to prepare the semantic definitions:</p>
<ul>
	<li>The Berlin Taxonomic Information Model, MoReTax view (Berendsohn &
						al., http://www.bgbm.org/scripts/ASP/BGBMModel/Catalogues.asp?Cat=MT</li>
	<li>DiversityTaxonomy model version 0.7 (G. Hagedorn & T. Gräfenhan
						2002, http://160.45.63.11/Workbench/Taxonomy/Model/InformationModels.html)</li>
	<li>ABCD version 1.44, types HigherTaxonRankType and RankAbbreviationType, by W.
						Berendsohn, reviewed by D. Hobern</li>
	<li>TaxCat2 - Database of Botanical Taxonomic Categories by Jörg Ochsmann, IPK
						Gatersleben; http://mansfeld.ipk-gatersleben.de/TaxCat2/default.htm</li>
</ul>
<p>A separate enumeration and several ranks have been added to the original list
				to better accomodate names from ICNCP. (RDH).
				</p>
<p>Many thanks for review and help go to Dr. Walter Gams.</p>
<p>Note: the list of all ranks is implemented as a union of all following rank
					subsets. Note that although BioCode has been used to define the partition into
					subsets, the ranks are not limited to BioCode but should be an interoperable
					superset of ranks used in Virology, Bacteriology, Botany and Zoology.</p>

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode "family
				group", i.e. infrafamily to superfamily

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode "subdivision
				of a family", i.e. ranks between genus group and family group

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode "genus group",
				i.e. infragenus to genus

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode ""subdivision
				of a genus" ", i.e. all ranks between genus and species group (i.e. not including
				subgenus and species)

Subset of ranks; equivalent to BioCode "species
				group", i.e. only species and subspecies