[Zoobank-list] RE: ZooBank Data Objects

[Richard Pyle]

Hi Chris,

> Up to a point, probably; the only nagging thought I have here 
> is that in some works the author will be discussing / 
> interpreting previous usages of a name, so part of the text 
> will refer to the current author's usage instance, whilst the 
> name elsewhere in the text will refer to his interpretation 
> (or repetition) of someone else's usage instance.  

Right -- but at that point you're talking about cross-referencing taxonomic
concepts, aren't you?  Certainly there needs to be a data structure to
accommodate this sort of information (what I believe is called
"RelationshipAssertions" in TCS).  But I see this as more concept-based
information, than name based information.  Certainly it involves names (in
the sense of strings of text that represent names), and there needs to be a
mechanism for capturing the intended references to those name-strings.
So...I'm not sure what the best answer is.

> This may 
> be getting into such obscure detail that we can never hope to 
> parse out and interpret the context, but it does become 
> fairly apparent in catalogues, for example, where one might 
> wish to resolve the 'same' name in different directions, 
> depending on which publication is being cited as its origin.  
> I guess that in all cases we have to look at cost/benefit of 
> applying a GUID (or a placeholder for one).  

Yes -- none of this stuff is written in stone (yet...).  I guess we need to
get a clearer sense for where nomenclature ends, and taxon concept
information begins (if there is even a way to disambiguate the two).  And
yes, at some point it's important to capture the core elements in a
structured way, punting the subtleties into a "text-blob" sort of comment or
annotation.  But at the same time, I understand your point about the need to
parse "sub-usages" (for lack of a better term) within the context of a
single publication.

I just wish my head didn't hurt so much whenever I try to wrap it around
these sorts of discussions.... :-)

Aloha,
Rich



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.