search

gbif / rs.gbif.org

GBIF machine-readable resources
https://rs.gbif.org
11 stars 13 forks source link

Generated schemas following MaterialEntity ratification, plus updated… #121

Closed tucotuco closed 4 months ago

tucotuco commented 9 months ago

… vocabulary for basisOfRecord.

MattBlissett commented 9 months ago

Sorry @tucotuco, I have accidentally pushed a fix to the generation script to master, I meant to make a PR: https://github.com/tdwg/dwc/commit/abde0ccd3a822a1fd9933f14442f324590bcf417

The record level terms were missing from the taxon core definition.

MattBlissett commented 9 months ago

Comments from previous PR:

These XML files are now generated with this script using the term_versions.csv file as the authority for term definitions and comments. If there are desired changes to how the XML files are produced, please submit an issue citing this script.

Note that these submissions do not address these open issues: https://github.com/gbif/rs.gbif.org/issues/96 https://github.com/gbif/rs.gbif.org/issues/73

If any of these changes are desired, please alert by submitting an issue so we can change the generation script.

This issue has been addressed with the new eventType field: https://github.com/gbif/rs.gbif.org/issues/63

tucotuco commented 9 months ago

OK, I was going to check the outcome of running the script. I was worried that record-level terms at the end of the list would make for an inconsistency in presentation in the IPT.

MattBlissett commented 9 months ago

I don't know why, but they' are at the end of the file in the current Taxon core definition: https://github.com/gbif/rs.gbif.org/blob/master/core/dwc_taxon_2022-02-02.xml#L53-L65

tucotuco commented 9 months ago

Hmm, they were in the version from 2015 too. I guess I will worry less. Still, I will run through the process and commit a new taxon core with a version dated today just to make sure the pipeline works correctly...

tucotuco commented 9 months ago

OK, that should take care of all the recent changes in generated versions of the core schema definitions.

MattBlissett commented 9 months ago

I think you've forgotten to commit the new ones.

tucotuco commented 9 months ago

I had forgotten to add them. Doh! Fixed now.

timrobertson100 commented 9 months ago

@MattBlissett - I see you've approved these but didn't merge. Do these reflect everything we expect to now test in ipt.gbif.org and gbif-uat.org or is there a known reason to hold them back?

Thanks

MattBlissett commented 9 months ago

It's everything we need for UAT testing, and it's fine to merge it. (But as it's a sort of deployment, I won't do it now.)

timrobertson100 commented 9 months ago

Thanks