| Line 17 was replaced by line 17 |
| - Functions to implement ([SeekTaxonTools]) |
| + !! [CaseStudiesAndSMSIntegration] |
| Removed lines 19-47 |
| - ! Current Focus |
| - 1. TCS creation function |
| - * create TCS from user input data |
| - |
| - 2. Viewing in multiple ways (for scientists/policy makers too) |
| - * __Interactive__ function for viewing existing matching concepts and decision making |
| - |
| - 3. Visualization Function (Small scale) |
| - * Filter by different attributes, View and edit info in TOS in different manners |
| - |
| - 4. Multi-classification Visualization function (Large scale down to small) |
| - * Several trees - see multiple matching concepts from a query within their classification trees |
| - |
| - ! Backend or later |
| - 5. EML taxonomic data creation - function to create whatever EML group decides upon (EML group) |
| - * plugin to Morpho |
| - |
| - 6. Other Schema to TCS mapping (behind the scenes) |
| - * XSLT transform? |
| - |
| - 7. Merge datasets (later) |
| - * need input from SEEK |
| - * unified concepts for 2 datasets containing taxa that can be analyzed together |
| - * important, but later, many issues |
| - |
| - 8. Peer Review function (low priority) |
| - * Way to filter for UNPUBLISHED data in the TOS for particular user/editor community |
| - * Use visualization function |
| - |
| Removed lines 51-162 |
| - !! Personas |
| - ! Ronald |
| - * Community ecologist |
| - * Taxonomic expertise in particular taxa in geographic region |
| - * keep track of community |
| - * use taxonomic data available to improve classification of community |
| - * capture info |
| - * datasets persist over time for monitoring and consistency in treatment |
| - * data compatible with similar efforts in other geo areas |
| - |
| - !! User information |
| - * ITIS is not useful, concept and how it was developed is wrong |
| - ** currently looking at data just at face value, names only |
| - ** looking at old data, changes over tiime |
| - * Sharing, integration of data, names, is that a problem? - yes, it's our job |
| - ** If can determine relationships b/w different uses of a name, will correct |
| - * Distinguish between nomenclature and usage |
| - * JK - how do you separate names vs meaning? |
| - ** lots of times concepts introduced in papers, with no name attached |
| - ** a name with no author string can be assumed to be the original concept |
| - ** poorly annotated names cannot be resolved - won't bother |
| - * Need a collaborative tool to look at differences of opinion over time - literature, images, type specimens |
| - * Don't care to document geographic and typological? changes of concepts over time - provide the references for those who are interested in this. Perhaps JK is overestimating the importance of this historical information |
| - * Paradox - want all the info, synonymies, etc available, but also want a single, simple list |
| - * Who is going to populate this database? |
| - ** Bob - start fresh, with new info (ask about his point here) |
| - * don't give too much authority to "online", this data is transient, don't confuse with archived data |
| - * Dan - revisions of his species are just reshuffling, table of valid species, maintain separate family, genus, species, Fritz Haas and Simpson, [http://mussel-project.net], valid species assoc with an author, attached to nomen, |
| - * Paul would like our tools to not only handle quagmire of legacy data, but help us go forward |
| - * Brian Fisher - ants in Madagascar - several kilos of ants every month for 7 years - very few identifications completed. Now can objectively identify from DNA overnight. |
| - |
| - !! Target users |
| - |
| - Wed 16 Feb 2005 |
| - |
| - ! Providers of Data |
| - * P1 Taxonomists |
| - * P2 Aggregators |
| - * P3 Publishers |
| - |
| - ! Users of Data |
| - * Amateur taxonomists |
| - * Scientists/ecologists |
| - ** E1 Ecologists creating datasets |
| - ** E2 Ecologists trying to answer broad-scale global questions |
| - ** E3 Scientists trying to help policy makers make decisions |
| - * Public |
| - * Government decision makers |
| - |
| - ! Our tasks |
| - 1. Populate database |
| - ** harvest |
| - ** P1/E2 help relate concepts |
| - *** First 4 functions above |
| - *** Tasks |
| - **** add known concepts |
| - **** create new concepts |
| - **** relate existing concepts |
| - |
| - !! BEAM Use Case (Call with Kate Jones) |
| - |
| - * Want old datasets, old treatments/classifications of bats |
| - * Has mappings (digital format) b/w names as in Wilson/Reeder with valid names 1993 |
| - * some geographic ranges - difficult with past names |
| - * will find out what others do wrt identifying species from old data |
| - * Nico: want to track species naming for a group back to Linneaus (she laughs) |
| - * Interesting: Pipistrellus genus, red bat, Molossidae |
| - * Our plan: |
| - ** Get data from Kate |
| - ** See what is missing |
| - ** How can we make it easy for her to enter missing links |
| - |
| - !! Bats chosen as group |
| - * different type of migration |
| - * insectivors |
| - * ecological issues |
| - |
| - !! SMS/Taxon interaction (Call with Matt) |
| - * Minimal interaction - SMS is client of TOS - Shawn & Thau's ant demo showed problems |
| - ** They were modeling for ants - species is an instance of a class in OWL |
| - ** Info to be resolved can be done with database approach, difficult to scale up |
| - ** observations spread over thousands of species - in their approach load everything into memory |
| - ** If they contact server for each species, lots of overhead |
| - * Matt thinks lots of overlap - Taxon is special case of SMS |
| - ** Susan - Overhead dealt with by resolving datasets ahead of time and stored/indexed |
| - ** Data integration - can't easily be done ahead of time |
| - ** We are further along with working system than SMS, so that may hamper integration |
| - * Email SMS asking for OWL format for Taxon info |
| - ** did EML to OWL |
| - * JK: Where do we fit in? |
| - ** Niche modeling - search ecogrid for species occurrence data with name/species/concept overlaps |
| - ** Looking for name - may look for something precise or loosely defined |
| - ** Look for any number of taxa and return clustered groups of consistent taxa |
| - ** Want non-overlapping list of concepts for modeling? |
| - ** N-way mapping of concepts |
| - *** for mammals of NA, mammals w/in bounding box - list |
| - *** every item should represent single concept |
| - *** drag each item on canvas and user decides whether to use for analysis |
| - ** BEAM proposal that Nico sent out is good description of SEEK needs from Taxon |
| - * Digir data - may need private aggreement to use collector/date though not expose |
| - !Action item |
| - * BEAM think about scenarios useful to Taxon |
| - *** Niche modeling case study (mostly museum data) |
| - *** Biodiversity case study (more ecological data) - is there documentation? Not yet |
| - *** Domain experts? |
| - *** Maybe Rob or Aimee go to KR/SMS/BEAM mtg - 7-10 March at UC Davis |
| - * Engage SMS group before May |
| - ** ex: OWL output for Taxon info - get someone with more ecological background involved as well - Mark, Deana, Matt |
| - ** Next time we contact Shawn, ask Matt to join us |
| - * EML - taxonomic metadata needs to be present, but usually in the data itself |
| - ** now, 3 distinct locations in EML, entire thing should be revisited |
| - ** relationship b/w EML and Biological Data Profile (BDP) FGDC data standards |
