| Line 8 was replaced by line 8 |
| - * Powerpoint = VegBank_taxon_Jan2004.ppt |
| + * Powerpoint = [VegBank_taxon_Jan2004.ppt] |
| Lines 158-177 were replaced by lines 158-175 |
| - {{{ |
| - 1. ES: Develop specific use cases for SMS system using taxonomic info in OWL, use GARP as inspiration (~DaveT, Shawn, Nico, ~DaveV) |
| - 1. ES: Simple prototype of Data Discovery use case on limited data set that has been fully tagged with concepts (Shawn, Rich, ~DaveT) |
| - 1. ES: Assemble example data sets, including concept data and tag Darwin Core / EML data with concepts (Bob, Rich), try to send initial data dump to Jessie for testing early, then later provide rest |
| - * Angelfishes (Rich) |
| - * Plants Juglandaceae (Bob, Xianhua) |
| - * More extensive but shallow mapping between Flora of NA and Plants from USDA/ITIS (Bob, Xianhua) |
| - * Maybe generate a virtual data world that is clean but illustrates the common mapping issues |
| - 1. TDWG: Update current implemention to be consistent with interfaces described in (5,6) (Robert, Aimee) |
| - * data proxying methods |
| - * example data provided (Rich, Bob) is put into exchange syntax (Jessie) and loaded in implementation using the implemented population APIs (Robert) |
| - * findConcepts operation is high priority |
| - * Robert and Aimee will email a proposed priority order for implementation after discussing with Susan |
| - * Robert and Aimee produce status report for implementation for eScience Meeting |
| - 1. TDWG: Test harness to check system integrity based on well-known test data from 12 () |
| - 1. PA: Design mapping tools, ie the interface for taxonomists and ecologists to do mappings (Xianhua, Nico, Matt) |
| - 1. ES: Build a makeshift GUID system using Handle system (~RobertK, Matt, Rich, Jessie, ~DaveT) (end of Feb) |
| - * Comparison table of pros/cons of GUID systems, precursor to publication on same topic (~DaveT, Jim, Nico) (deliver by end of first week of Feb) |
| - 1. TDWG: Visualization tools prototype in May, something more complete by TDWG (Jessie, ~MartinG) |
| - }}} |
| + * 1. ES: Develop specific use cases for SMS system using taxonomic info in OWL, use GARP as inspiration (~DaveT, Shawn, Nico, ~DaveV) |
| + * 1. ES: Simple prototype of Data Discovery use case on limited data set that has been fully tagged with concepts (Shawn, Rich, ~DaveT) |
| + * 1. ES: Assemble example data sets, including concept data and tag Darwin Core / EML data with concepts (Bob, Rich), try to send initial data dump to Jessie for testing early, then later provide rest |
| + ** Angelfishes (Rich) |
| + ** Plants Juglandaceae (Bob, Xianhua) |
| + ** More extensive but shallow mapping between Flora of NA and Plants from USDA/ITIS (Bob, Xianhua) |
| + ** Maybe generate a virtual data world that is clean but illustrates the common mapping issues |
| + * 1. TDWG: Update current implemention to be consistent with interfaces described in (5,6) (Robert, Aimee) |
| + ** data proxying methods |
| + ** example data provided (Rich, Bob) is put into exchange syntax (Jessie) and loaded in implementation using the implemented population APIs (Robert) |
| + ** findConcepts operation is high priority |
| + ** Robert and Aimee will email a proposed priority order for implementation after discussing with Susan |
| + ** Robert and Aimee produce status report for implementation for eScience Meeting |
| + * 1. TDWG: Test harness to check system integrity based on well-known test data from 12 () |
| + * 1. PA: Design mapping tools, ie the interface for taxonomists and ecologists to do mappings (Xianhua, Nico, Matt) |
| + * 1. ES: Build a makeshift GUID system using Handle system (~RobertK, Matt, Rich, Jessie, ~DaveT) (end of Feb) |
| + ** Comparison table of pros/cons of GUID systems, precursor to publication on same topic (~DaveT, Jim, Nico) (deliver by end of first week of Feb) |
| + * 1. TDWG: Visualization tools prototype in May, something more complete by TDWG (Jessie, ~MartinG) |
