| Lines 9-11 were replaced by lines 9-10 |
| - |
| - # Clearer vision of how to collaborate with projects that will be the bases for those collaborations |
| - # Understanding of what we have not achieved so far with SEEK Taxon, things left undone, can they be achieved in the next 18 months. |
| + # Clarify a vision of how SEEK-Taxon could collaborate with other projects with taxon concept data |
| + # Reach an understanding of what we have not achieved so far with SEEK Taxon, things left undone and identfy priorities for the next 18 months. |
| Line 13 was replaced by lines 12-14 |
| - # Identfy priorities for the next 18 months. |
| + |
| + |
| + __ Round the Table Updates: __ |
| Removed line 15 |
| - __ Round the table updates: __ |
| Line 17 was replaced by line 17 |
| - ** TOS operational, MSW 2 versions, ITIS, Bob offered plant data sets |
| + ** TOS operational and on line, Mamnal Species of the World 2 versions in TOS now, also ITIS. Bob offered plant data sets. |
| Line 19 was replaced by lines 19-20 |
| - ** Kepler Actor in the ENM workflow, |
| + ** Kepler Actor in the ENM workflow, but Rob has not heard from Dan Higgins on next steps with integration with Kepler. |
| + |
| Line 21 was replaced by lines 22-23 |
| - ** Testing concept mapper |
| + ** Testing ConceptMapper, working with Bob and Laura on usability engineering |
| + |
| At line 23 added 1 line. |
| + |
| Line 25 was replaced by lines 28-29 |
| - ** Able to drop in DC records into the Viz tool, e.g. from any DiGIR provider using the MaNIS schema. |
| + ** Implemented capability to drop in Darwin Core records into the renamed TaxViz tool, from any DiGIR provider using the MaNIS schema. |
| + |
| Line 27 was replaced by line 31 |
| - ** Meeting before TDWG 2006, to create stds for plot data. Taxon concept data would be embedded in the std and in the data sets. |
| + ** Scheduled to meet prior to TDWG 2006, to create standards for plot data. Taxon concept data would be embedded in the std and in the data sets. |
| At line 28 added 1 line. |
| + |
| At line 31 added 1 line. |
| + |
| Lines 33-35 were replaced by lines 39-41 |
| - ** New Specify and Specify in 2007. Dave Remsen, uBIO interest |
| - |
| - __ Tasks to be finished from original objectives __ |
| + ** Released last week Specify 5.0 and have work underway for a modular Java release in 2007 which would use concepts from TOS. |
| + |
| + __ Discussion of tasks to be finished from original objectives __ |
| Line 43 was replaced by line 49 |
| - ** Jessie Significance statement of dealing with concepts and not with names –the slide of lumping and splitting the consequences of misinterpreting name lists. Changes in name over time can create errors for analysis that are artifacts of the names and concepts used through time. |
| + ** Jessie, need a strong significance statement of dealing with concepts and not with names, e.g. the slide of lumping and splitting the consequences of misinterpreting name lists. Changes in name over time can create errors for analysis that are artifacts of the choice of names and concepts used. |
| Removed lines 56-71 |
| - SPNHC Meeting, SEEK Taxon Poster |
| - |
| - Taxon Breakouts |
| - Laura with Bob and Xianhua review ConceptMapper usability |
| - |
| - |
| - Future Collaborations for SEEK Taxon |
| - |
| - |
| - Demonstration Project |
| - |
| - 1. SEEK Workflow idea, creating a new classification, export into TCS import to TOS, export data to conceptmapper and txax viz. |
| - 2. Map relationships between TOS and new data. |
| - 3. Marking up data with EML and GUIDS |
| - |
| - Using GARP showing impact on different classifications on noche models with ranuculus. |
| At line 72 added 1 line. |
| + __ Possible Future Collaborations for SEEK Taxon __ |
| Removed line 74 |
| - 1. adding common names and using them for queries might be good. |
| At line 75 added 1 line. |
| + * Demonstration Project |
| At line 76 added 11 lines. |
| + # SEEK Workflow idea, creating a new classification, export into TCS, import to TOS, export data to Conceptmapper and to TaxViz. |
| + # An application, or (Kepler?) workflo for mapping relationships between TOS and new data. |
| + # Marking up data with EML and GUIDS |
| + # Using GARP showing impact on different classifications on noche models with ranuculus. |
| + # Adding common names and using them for queries might be good. |
| + |
| + * Collaborations with others |
| + ** Other people "doing concepts" -- uBIO, Rod Paige, New Zealand research lab, GBIF plans for concepts are unclear. |
| + ** USDA Plants, Stinger wants to do concepts. |
| + ** Specify could implement an itnerface to the TOS for collections management using concepts. |
| + ** Bob, authoring tools that would allow people to contribute concepts to TOS and take ownership of concepts. A way for people to author new concepts and get instant gratification. |
| Removed lines 78-89 |
| - uBIO and Rod Paige, GBIF, Jessie, no idea on what GBIF or Europeans plans are with concepts. GBIF has catalog of life. |
| - |
| - USDA Plants, Stinger wants to do concepts. |
| - |
| - Collections Specify Concepts, should we pursue that. |
| - |
| - Jessie, we should not look so far into the future, the broader impacts. |
| - |
| - * Bob, authoring tools that would allow people to contribute concepts to TOS and take ownership of concepts. A way for people to author new concepts and get instant gratification. |
| - |
| - * Jessie, the NHM has an EU funded project to develop two different taxonomies online. (Does not know of anyone in Europe or in the UK working with taxon concepts.) |
| - |
| Removed line 91 |
| - |
| Lines 93-96 were replaced by line 82 |
| - |
| - ** Wanted a collaborative tool for authoring inventories of major groups, want literature online. |
| - |
| - * Jessie, we have a solution for our own problems. |
| + ** Wanted a collaborative tool for authoring inventories of major groups, wanted literature online. |
| Line 98 was replaced by lines 84-85 |
| - ** Next steps Jessie: Getting people who have concepts and manage concepts on Board and get them to start managing concepts. Letting us serve their data. MSW may have more data. |
| + * Jessie, that's fine but we are working on a solution for our own problems, not those. |
| + ** Next steps Jessie: Getting people who have concepts and manage concepts on Board and get them to start managing concepts. Letting us serve their data. |
| Removed line 102 |
| - * Discussion about things that we have not done. (Suggested by Jessie). |
| Removed line 104 |
| - ** Where we failed, not getting decent concept people on Board with us earlier. What does ‘on board’ mean? No clear idea. |
| Line 106 was replaced by line 91 |
| - ** Jessie we really need a good demonstration project in the short term one that demonstrates our capabilities but not directed to solving any particular outreach problem for any particular group, it is too late in the project for that. |
| + __ Discussion about things that we have not done. (Suggested by Jessie) __ |
| Line 108 was replaced by lines 93-95 |
| - * Laura, what problem is being solved? Can you tell me in three sentences. |
| + * Jessie |
| + ** It was an oversight not to get active researchers using concepts on board with us earlier. |
| + ** We really need a good demonstration project in the short term one that demonstrates our capabilities but not directed to solving any particular outreach problem for any particular group, it is too late in the project for that. |
| At line 109 added 1 line. |
| + * Laura, what problem is being solved? Can you tell me in three sentences. |
| At line 110 added 1 line. |
| + ** Jessie, the real issue for us that ecologists are our users. We need to serve them, and to convince them that what they are doing is wrong to ignore concepts. We need to convince them to take on these problems, without adding much or any other workload, then they will collaborate We have to mail their lives easier. |
| Line 112 was replaced by lines 101-102 |
| - * Jessie, the real issue for us that ecologists are our users. We need to serve them, and to convince them that what they are doing is wrong to ignore concepts. We need to convince them to take on these problems, without adding much or any other workload, then they will collaborate We have to mail their lives easier. |
| + * Laura, they have to see the perceived benefit to play |
| + * Bob, or they have to play by the rules. |
| Removed lines 114-115 |
| - * They have to see the perceived benefit to play -- Laura, or They have to play by the rules -- Bob. |
| - |
| Line 124 was replaced by lines 112-113 |
| - * Jessie -- Big Unresolved SEEK-Taxon Issues as illustrated by dry-erase board diagram. (incomplete notes here -- ed.) |
| + |
| + __ Big Unresolved SEEK-Taxon Issues as illustrated by dry-erase board diagram by Jessie. (incomplete notes here -- ed., who has the photograph?) |
| Line 154 was replaced by lines 143-151 |
| - SEEK_Taxon Breakout Session to discuss priorities and next steps |
| + __ SEEK_Taxon Breakout Session to discuss priorities and next steps __ |
| + |
| + * Make a stronger connection to Kepler |
| + * Need to get more data, and to get the bat data mapped, Bob offered plant concept data also |
| + * Jim offered to pursue the identification and engagement of a Mammalogist to help with bat concept data mapping |
| + |
| + * And ... |
| + |
| + |
