Open debpaul opened 2 years ago
with Jared's data from INHS, we need FossilSpecimen not "PreservedSpecimen"
This is kind of lousy semantics, but we can do it. Fossils a) can be preserved, and b) are preserved, just not by humans.
with Jared's data from INHS, we need FossilSpecimen not "PreservedSpecimen"
This is kind of lousy semantics, but we can do it. Fossils a) can be preserved, and b) are preserved, just not by humans.
Yah, it's a huge issue though. A flag of some sort is needed (basisOfRecord likely to change in the future). In aggregation, people want a way to sort / get ONLY fossils, or NOT fossils. Hence, this request. If frustrates A LOT of paleontologists when they cannot do this with aggregated data. Similarly, hard to help the marine folks get only the "Marine" specimens or "non-terrestrial" from aggregated data.
It's a general problem, filtering by attributes of a CollectionObject. Treating those attributes as row-types is not the answer. Understanding how to nest those attributes, and where we go to look for them, can better help resolve this. I'm sure there is a URI for fossil out there somewhere, if it matches the definition then this is the data attribute to hang off the collection object.
@LocoDelAssembly could you please add the 3 data types we can map? to this form https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonworks_doc/blob/dwc/manuals/DWC_IMPORT.md. That is, dwc terms we can import, and the two other types (TW: ...) and?
The importer creates collection objects out of the occurrences records, so basisOfRecord
could be anything that maps into collection object. Is there any special handling for FossilSpecimen
or I could just add it as another allowed term @mjy?
@LocoDelAssembly let's do this:
All FossilSpecimen must be have a BiocurationClassification linked to a term with the URI http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/FossilSpecimen
.
Importer behaviour:
Some things to consider regarding the DwC Importer and notes / mapping in the DWC_IMPORT.md file.