| Line 5 was replaced by lines 5-36 |
| - Possible collaboration point is functional attribute database to |
| + Possible collaboration point: reasoning over functional attribute database |
| + |
| + |
| + Semantic mediator will call TOS |
| + |
| + EML |
| + * Maintain GUIDs in metadata or resolve dynamically |
| + ** Could bind resolution if done by original data collector/author |
| + ** Third party resolution results could improve over time until TOS cache is somewhat stable. |
| + ** Who is responsible for the association if not maintained in EML? |
| + |
| + Use Case: |
| + * Scientist brings in 2 datasets |
| + * Resolve names for each list |
| + * Can this data be integrated? yes/no |
| + ** Need Integrate function: integrate(list1, list2, resolutionLevel). (This is already on the task list for Taxon) |
| + |
| + For a more automated workflow approach - maybe associate taxonType[] as output port for dataset actor and input port for analysis actor |
| + |
| + Additional input for findConcepts: |
| + * ancillary data to help resolve concept (i.e. geographic, functional, temporal data about dataset) |
| + * level of desired resolution (could be part of algorithm) |
| + |
| + Additional functionality needed from TOS: |
| + * Resolve a list of names to a __rescaled__ list of concepts |
| + ** step 1: names to concepts (with user interaction?) |
| + *** how is this determined when taxonomists make judgements based on taxonomic author/provider? |
| + ** step 2: concept to parent |
| + *** third party relationships or originally defined concept relationships |
| + * Compatible(concept1, concept2, criteria) - someone needs to define criteria for analysis. |
| + * List of names: are these most recent/best names; what are ambiguities, and need for human intervention to resolve; which GUID associated for co-referencing with other data. |
| + * Within a list of names where entries have differing resolutions, want to (automatically) rescale these requiring lumping to reconcile |
