Closed ymgan closed 1 year ago
Thanks Mathew! The reason I suggested this is we had data provider who had their dataset reviewed (by a certain journal) which requested them to change the scientificName
to accepted name. This led to unintentional change of the identifiers as aphiaID was used to construct occurrenceID
that way.
We want to make sure that the occurrenceID
is as stable as possible because we want people to be able to trace it. They may unintentionally change it if they use the fields that are likely to change. I guess that's one of the downside of composite identifiers. I hope this makes sense! Btw, thank you very much for preparing the training materials!
@albenson-usgs I'm assigning this to you. This PR proposes the addition of the following sentence to the comment of the
occurrenceID
I think it's a fine addition, FWIW.