plazi vocabulary

[myrmoteras]

@tcatapano @punkish @mguidoti @retog @mguidoti
we need to develop a "plazi vocabulary" to assure we can communicate across our various projects, import to GBIF, create "clean" RDF, etc.

What is the proper process recommended?

• use this plazi/ontologies repo
• add all the projects and local lists, vocabularies
• describe the goal
• describe the subprojects to get there, eg.
  • described what we want the goal is
  • create github PlaziVocabulary
  • add all the various lists, etc so we have an overview
  • decide on a format how we want to document and map all the vocabularies
  • map the part-vocabularies
  • describe all the terms
  • map the mapped plazi vocabulary with DWC and other existing vocabularies
  • define the elements that do not map
  • create a reference vocabulary that allows to cite the terms

At that stage, I would restrain from building an ontology, since we do not have the resources, and it is at least for me now clear, whether we need one right now.?

I would like to see that we have this vocabulary ready by October 15 for our TDWG presentations.

some of the existing vocabularies:

1. Plazi article: https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/dioStats/fields or just add ?format=JSON
2. Plazi treatments: https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/srsStats/fields.
3. Mapping NMBE-RDF ontologies https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1OeI8zfbzFB27FGos_l0snwaBuqNEaZ3d1FByjvkVO9E/edit#gid=816562804
4. TB: https://hackmd.io/IcBwiUG8TtiQ-Vd0oY_-mg
5. Zenodeo
6. RDF terms by Reto
7. Documentations and Vocabularies
8. Documentations, Glossaries, Ontologies and Vocabularies
9. GoldenGate Glossary
10. Plazi Glossary

[retog]

Why would you want to create a new GitHub project? Ontology and vocabulary are more or less synonyms so if we have an ontology we have the vocabulary (i.e. the list of properties and classes).

[retog]

At that stage, I would restrain from building an ontology, since we do not have the resources, and it is at least for me now clear, whether we need one right now.?

We need an ontology for the RDF representations, otherwise they are totally meaningless. We also need terms in other formats, there the terms might be contextually defined in the definition of the format and so have different meanings in different contexts, but as I don't think that we're doing this and the existing vocabularies like DWC don't use such contextual meaning, I think we should use terms defined in a proper ontology in every format and context.

[punkish]

there is a data-dictionary at https://test.zenodeo.org/ that lists every queryable field of every resource with explanations and examples.

[tcatapano]

FWIW, the concepts behind TaxPub elements are defined here:

https://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/TaxPub

e.g., https://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/tp:treatment-sec

I do, however, think that this task this broadly defined is unlikely to be accomplished by Oct 15. Besides, do we really have the capacity given other projects underway (e.g., the website migration)? If this is an idea, that's fine. But if it's a project, then at minimum milestones should be created and ideally a project board to track progress.