Talk:CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) - Revision history

bwf>Andreas Plank: /* remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604 */ Q:Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? A:I don’t know for sure, but reading the definition of dwc:eventDate …

2021-01-07T12:52:48Z

remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604: Q:Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? A:I don’t know for sure, but reading the definition of dwc:eventDate …

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:52, 7 January 2021
Line 13:		Line 13:
	* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?		* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?
	* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.		* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.
			*: I don’t know for sure, but reading the definition of <tt>dwc:eventDate</tt> and reading the meaning of event (in [https://www.etymonline.com/word/event#etymonline_v_11707 etymonline.com]: “that which happens”) one has to determine the event type, I guess; so <tt>dwc:eventDate</tt> can be any event. And <tt>dc:created</tt> is per definition «Date of creation of the resource» which I would interpret more as to belong to the herbarium sheet of paper that has been created. --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 13:49, 7 January 2021 (CET)

	== Relations of CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) and expressed RDF somewhat baffling ==		== Relations of CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) and expressed RDF somewhat baffling ==

bwf>Andreas Plank: /* A few remarks on the CSPP */ on top of the page; parts that are done: below

2020-06-24T08:50:48Z

 A few remarks on the CSPP: on top of the page; parts that are done: below

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:50, 24 June 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Alert box\|content=For nested discussion you can use the <code><nowiki>:</nowiki></code> as first character for indenting texts and mark your comments by your signature <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> (becomes replaced by the Wiki)}}		{{Alert box\|content=For nested discussion you can use the <code><nowiki>:</nowiki></code> as first character for indenting texts and mark your comments by your signature <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> (becomes replaced by the Wiki). ''Recommendation:'' add new topics on the top, not on the bottom.}}

	__TOC__		__TOC__


			== A few remarks on the CSPP{{anchor\|remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604}} ==

			Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):

			* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in {{abbr\|MIDS}} the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.
			*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)
			*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)
			* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?
			* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.

	== Relations of CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) and expressed RDF somewhat baffling ==		== Relations of CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) and expressed RDF somewhat baffling ==
Line 26:		Line 37:

	I myself have difficulties to understand the CSPP proposal on one side and the mapping to the equivalent (classical) RDF on the other side, given no further documentation (yet). We should more clarify by example the relation of CSPP and classical RDF; or I have not understood it yet. --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 13:09, 26 November 2019 (CET)		I myself have difficulties to understand the CSPP proposal on one side and the mapping to the equivalent (classical) RDF on the other side, given no further documentation (yet). We should more clarify by example the relation of CSPP and classical RDF; or I have not understood it yet. --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 13:09, 26 November 2019 (CET)
			: {{done\|reason=Improved documentation --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 10:50, 24 June 2020 (CEST)}}

	== Example with commented CSPP elements ==		== Example with commented CSPP elements ==
Line 173:		Line 185:
	</syntaxhighlight>		</syntaxhighlight>
	</div>		</div>
			: {{done\|reason=Corrected documentation --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 10:50, 24 June 2020 (CEST)}}
	~~== A few remarks on the CSPP~~{{~~anchor~~\|~~remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604}} =~~=

	~~Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):~~

	* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in {{abbr\|MIDS}} the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.
	*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)
	*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)
	* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?
	* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.

	[[Category: Discussion]]		[[Category: Discussion]]

bwf>Andreas Plank: /* A few remarks on the CSPP */ +{{abbr|MIDS}} for better understanding of abbreviations ;-)

2020-06-15T11:53:58Z

A few remarks on the CSPP: +{{abbr|MIDS}} for better understanding of abbreviations ;-)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:53, 15 June 2020
Line 178:		Line 178:
	Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):		Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):

	* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.		* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in {{abbr\|MIDS}} the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.
	*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)		*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)
	*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)		*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)

bwf>Mathias Dillen: /* A few remarks on the CSPP{{anchor|remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604}} */

2020-06-15T11:02:42Z

A few remarks on the CSPP{{anchor|remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:02, 15 June 2020
Line 180:		Line 180:
	* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.		* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.
	*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)		*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)
			*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)
	* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?		* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?
	* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.		* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.

	[[Category: Discussion]]		[[Category: Discussion]]

bwf>Andreas Plank: +:Category: Discussion

2020-06-15T10:08:56Z

+Category: Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 15 June 2020
Line 182:		Line 182:
	* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?		* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?
	* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.		* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.

			[[Category: Discussion]]

bwf>Andreas Plank: +alert box, TOC

2020-06-15T09:24:27Z

+alert box, TOC

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:24, 15 June 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Alert box\|content=For nested discussion you can use the <code><nowiki>:</nowiki></code> as first character for indenting texts and mark your comments by your signature <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code> (becomes replaced by the Wiki)}}

			__TOC__

	== Relations of CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) and expressed RDF somewhat baffling ==		== Relations of CETAF Specimen Preview Profile (CSPP) and expressed RDF somewhat baffling ==

bwf>Andreas Plank: /* A few remarks on the CSPP */ Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-)

2020-06-11T10:08:55Z

A few remarks on the CSPP: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:08, 11 June 2020
Line 170:		Line 170:
	</div>		</div>

	== A few remarks on the CSPP ==		== A few remarks on the CSPP{{anchor\|remarks on the CSPP Mathias Dillen 20200604}} ==

	Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks:		Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):

	* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.		* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.
			*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)
	* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?		* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?

	* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.		* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.

bwf>Mathias Dillen: /* A few remarks on the CSPP */ new section

2020-06-04T11:32:51Z

A few remarks on the CSPP: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:32, 4 June 2020
Line 169:		Line 169:
	</syntaxhighlight>		</syntaxhighlight>
	</div>		</div>

			== A few remarks on the CSPP ==

			Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks:

			* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.

			* Why do we recommend dwc:fieldNumber and not dwc:recordNumber?

			* Why do we recommend dc:created and not dwc:eventDate? The latter is much more strongly connected to the gathering event, rather than the digital object.

bwf>Andreas Plank: --header='Content: …' => --header='Content-Type: …'

2020-01-13T10:26:17Z

--header='Content: …' => --header='Content-Type: …'

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:26, 13 January 2020
Line 3:		Line 3:
	From analysing returned RDF (e.g. http://id.snsb.info/snsb/collection/97112/153455/93009 accessed on 26th November 2019) we get the RDF, e.g. on Linux by		From analysing returned RDF (e.g. http://id.snsb.info/snsb/collection/97112/153455/93009 accessed on 26th November 2019) we get the RDF, e.g. on Linux by
	<syntaxhighlight lang="bash">		<syntaxhighlight lang="bash">
	wget --quiet --header='Accept: application/rdf+xml' --header='Content: application/rdf+xml' --output-document="id.snsb.info⁄snsb⁄collection⁄97112⁄153455⁄93009.rdf" "http://id.snsb.info/snsb/collection/97112/153455/93009"		wget --quiet --header='Accept: application/rdf+xml' --header='Content-Type: application/rdf+xml' --output-document="id.snsb.info⁄snsb⁄collection⁄97112⁄153455⁄93009.rdf" "http://id.snsb.info/snsb/collection/97112/153455/93009"
	</syntaxhighlight>		</syntaxhighlight>
	… and find in the RDF file:		… and find in the RDF file:

bwf>Andreas Plank: /* Example with commented CSPP elements */ +Anchor

2019-12-12T11:00:18Z

Example with commented CSPP elements: +Anchor

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:00, 12 December 2019
Line 25:		Line 25:
	== Example with commented CSPP elements ==		== Example with commented CSPP elements ==

	Perhaps provide a plain RDF example and a XML example. Plain RDF example (note that & is not escaped):		Perhaps provide a plain RDF example and [[#XML example\|a XML example]]. Plain RDF example (note that & is not escaped):
	<syntaxhighlight lang="xml">		<syntaxhighlight lang="xml">
	<rdf:RDF>		<rdf:RDF>
Line 94:		Line 94:
	</syntaxhighlight>		</syntaxhighlight>

	Same example as XML (note the escaped <code>&amp;</code>, you can expand the box ''on the right'')		{{Anchor\|XML example}}Same example as XML (note the escaped <code>&amp;</code>, you can expand the box ''on the right'')
	<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="Expand XML example" data-collapsetext="Collapse XML example">		<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" data-expandtext="Expand XML example" data-collapsetext="Collapse XML example">
	<syntaxhighlight lang="xml" class="mw-collapsible-content">		<syntaxhighlight lang="xml" class="mw-collapsible-content">

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:53, 15 June 2020
Line 178:		Line 178:
	Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):		Reading through the profile, I have a few remarks ([[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] 13:32, 4 June 2020‎ (CET)):

	* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in MIDS the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.		* kindOfMaterial / type: Shouldn't we use Dublin Core's controlled vocabulary for type (e.g. PhysicalObject)? And use dwc:basisOfRecord for PreservedSpecimen. There is less consensus for how to define what kind of specimen it is (e.g. herbarium sheet), but in {{abbr\|MIDS}} the recommendation is to use dwc:preparations.
	*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)		*: Short question of understanding, what is MIDS ? (I have trouble understanding some less common abbreviations ;-) --[[User:Andreas Plank\|Andreas Plank]] ([[User talk:Andreas Plank\|talk]]) 12:08, 11 June 2020 (CEST)
	*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)		*:: Apologies. Minimum Information for Digital Specimens. [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GKLVXs_vDqeRiAPxfhOg0J7KaxNmTS_n5Znl_DU3eks/ More info]. --[[User:Mathias Dillen\|Mathias Dillen]] ([[User talk:Mathias Dillen\|talk]]) 13:02, 15 June 2020 (CEST)