Add references attribute to RDF about dwc HOT 7 CLOSED

I think this is something that has to be brought to public commentary. I like it, but it is a change to the normative standard.

from dwc.

Ok, do you want to bring this up before or after the January workathon?

from dwc.

The sooner the better. tdwg-content is going to be overwhelmed with things
to review.

On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Peter Desmet [email protected]
wrote:

Ok, do you want to bring this up before or after the January workathon?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4 (comment).

from dwc.

Ok, go ahead. 📫

from dwc.

A Darwin Core term would make a better example, since the Dublin Core terms are not in the TDWG Media Wiki at the moment.

From:

Identifier:   http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/basisOfRecord
Definition:  The specific nature of the data record.
Comment:  Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as the list of Darwin Core classes. Examples: "PreservedSpecimen", "FossilSpecimen", "LivingSpecimen", "HumanObservation", "MachineObservation". For discussion see http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/dwc:basisOfRecord

To:

Identifier:   http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/basisOfRecord
Definition:  The specific nature of the data record.
Comment:  Recommended best practice is to use a controlled vocabulary such as the list of Darwin Core classes. Examples: "PreservedSpecimen", "FossilSpecimen", "LivingSpecimen", "HumanObservation", "MachineObservation". 
References: http://terms.tdwg.org/wiki/dwc:basisOfRecord

If you @peterdesmet agree, I would like to close this issue and open an new one with the specific proposal and without the discussion.

from dwc.

Sure, go ahead.

from dwc.

Closing this in favor of Issue #27, which is prepared with public commentary in mind.

from dwc.