search

tdwg / vocab

Vocabulary Maintenance Specification Task Group + SDS + VMS
11 stars 6 forks source link

Convention for presenting the namespace abbreviation as part of the term name #34

Closed baskaufs closed 8 years ago

baskaufs commented 8 years ago

Should it be required that the QName be included for terms defined by the standard? AC does, DwC doesn't. Example: "ac:caption" vs. "caption", or "dwc:recordedBy" vs. "recordedBy" See section 3.3.3.1 of the documentation specification.

Also, must the label be presented in the human-viewable metadata? AC does, DwC doesn't, although the RDF does include rdfs:label values.

tucotuco commented 8 years ago

Included how? Or where?

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Steve Baskauf notifications@github.com wrote:

Should it be required that the QName be included for terms defined by the standard? AC does, DwC doesn't. Example: "ac:caption" vs. "caption", or "dwc:recordedBy" vs. "recordedBy" See section 3.3.3.1 of the documentation specification.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/tdwg/vocab/issues/34

baskaufs commented 8 years ago

On the human-readable pages: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#scientificName says: "Term name: scientificName"

http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core_Term_List#dwc:scientificName says: "Term name: dwc:scientificName", which is a "borrowed" term, but also says "Term name: ac:commenter" , which is NOT a borrowed term and is defined by AC itself. AC always includes the namespace abbreviation for every term, but DwC only includes it if the term is borrowed from Dublin Core.

I'm not sure how important this is, but it's the kind of picky detail that the previous draft of the Documentation Specification went into. Do we care?

With respect to the label, it's the second field in the AC tables at http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/Audubon_Core_Term_List but is not found at all in the tables at http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm

tucotuco commented 8 years ago

In the 2016-05-04 call, there was a consensus that it is good practice to include the namespace qualifier in all references that are not specifically the label and therefore should be recommended.

ansell commented 8 years ago

+1 for referencing with a QName instead of a localName. Current systems (at least here at ALA) will break down if there are ever overlaps between localNames across vocabularies, where they would not if they use QName.

The use of the full IRI in databases would be ideal but the current ALA systems are solely driven by localName's from DWC. Changing the specs to emphasise the preferred QName's may help with starting a transition.

baskaufs commented 8 years ago

Edited section 3.3.3.1 according to consensus. Made "Label" required. It exists in the DwC RDF, so I can't think of a reason why it shouldn't be shown in the human-readable documents as well.