[Zoobank-list] Re: GBIF GUID Workshop Report

[Richard Pyle]

Hello Wolfgang,

> when botanists and mycologists, with their advanced names catalogues,
> want to proceed with GUIDs, does this mean that we should join
> before we have even started with basic steps like ZooBank?

I think so -- yes. The administration/issuance of GUIDs is independant of
the issue of Code-mandated (or even Code-optional) registration (although
when registration is implemented, one of its most fundamental roles will be
in the issuance of new GUIDs for name objects).  Obviously, ZooBank was
initiated primarily in the context of registration of new names.  However,
when it comes to "shared" data objects (like taxon names), the more
collective coordination that can take place early on, the better. ZooBank
seems like the natural platform for participation by the zoological
community, for what (I think) should be obvious reasons -- especially if a
large dataset from the Zoological Record being made available for the
initial establishment of ZooBank.

> Maybe it's not a bad idea to just wait and observe how happy they
> will be with assigning GUID-numbers to all pieces of information,
> including taxonomic names.

That is certainly an option -- and the most likely scenario if zoological
representatives fail to participate.  Another option is that
separate/individual zoological nomenclators will participate directly in the
process, leading to a mosaic of GUID issuers for zoological names.  While
this may not necessarily be a bad thing -- especially in the short term --
it may very well have significant impact on the overall relevance of ZooBank
as a coordinated portal for accessing zoological nomenclature in the long
term.

> So far, - at least as far I could observe it from portals like
> GBIF, -  the GUIDs discussion seemed to be in a state of infancy
> where even the role of ICZN, taxonomic concepts, etc. wasn't very clear.

To the extent that this effort is still in its infancy, there is time to
help shape the standards and procedures relating to the very foundations of
internationally coordinated biodiversity informatics.  There are some basic
differences in the way that botanical/mycological name "units" are defined
(e.g., treatments of new binomial and trinomial combinations are
code-governed acts), compared with how such zoological "units" are defined.
Without strong zoological participation in the GUID standard-setting
process, the zoological community may find itself somewhat out of synch with
other nomenclatural domains when it comes to exchanging electronic taxonomy
information seamlessly.

> ... well, probably I should to get myself updated on the subject (any help
appreciated!) ...

A good place to start would be the GBIF GUID Wiki site, as Simon and I cited
in our earlier post:

http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php

This site will no-doubt be expanding over the next few weeks, in response to
the Workshop that just concluded.

Aloha,
Rich

Richard L. Pyle, PhD
Database Coordinator for Natural Sciences
Department of Natural Sciences, Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/staff/pylerichard.html