[Taxacom] Wikispecies is not a database: part 3 (after thinkingabout it!)

Thu Aug 13 22:33:34 CDT 2009

> one of our objectives over the next two years
I don't mean to sound impolite (who, me?!), but ONE of your  
objectives! Crikey mate, you've got high hopes, haven't you? Two  
years! Well, it has taken Dennis Gordon 10 years, and there are still  
problems in getting out all of just a bare bones list of names of  
"everthing" in little Godzone, so what chance Oz? AFD haven't managed  
to achieve your lofty aims, so what's your secret? A hotline to the  
Creator???!!! Is your funding so open ended that you will be able to  
keep adding new stuff indefinitely, quickly after publication? Without  
knowing any details of your grand scheme, I suspect the end result  
might just be AFD with a few extra bells and whistles. It also sounds  
worryingly similar (albeit not identical) to reinventing Wikispecies!  
Same genus, different species ...
> I didn't mean to imply 'nothing is worse than bad information', rather
> 'absense of information is worse than bad information'. But this too
> is probably moot.
The latter is how I interpreted you. I would rather have no  
information on an issue than incorrect information, unless you could  
reasonably say that the "amount of incorrectness" (eh?) was within  
"acceptable bounds" (eh?)

Stephen

Quoting Jim Croft <jim.croft at gmail.com>:

> As a 'massive bureaucrat' I have to say that one of our objectives
> over the next two years is to produce 'something on everything' that
> grows, slithers, walks, crawls, swims or flies in Australia.  That
> 'something' will be at least a name, a typification, a taxonomic
> concept, a circumscription and a literature citation.   In many
> (most?) cases it will link to an image, an occurrence map, a
> description, related names and concepts and the usual taxon profile
> blather, from the literature and from the databases of the planet's
> massive bureaucrat overlords. The design includes provision for
> 'citizen science'  contribution, annotation and feedback.
>
> A technical and social design challenge will be to create the seamless
> pipeline between this and Wikipedia/Wikispecies.
>
> For me the conversation started last week, with the GLAM-wiki
> (Galleries Libraries, Archives Museums) conference in Canberra.
> Representatives from Wikipedia and most of the major cultural
> collecting institutionsgathered to talk about common interests and
> impediments (and advantages) to sharing information in the public
> domain.  There are considerable gulfs of culture between Wikipedia and
> the GLAM community, and even within the GLAM community itself, but
> everyone appears to be pointing, and wanting to be going, in more or
> less the same direction.  The next stage will be to talk specifics and
> technicalities.
>
> I didn't mean to imply 'nothing is worse than bad information', rather
> 'absense of information is worse than bad information'. But this too
> is probably moot.
>
> Be wary of the phrase 'just nomenclators' - dragons lurk within and
> many who have entered have not emerged, or at least not emerged
> sane...
>
> jim
>
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Stephen  
> Thorpe<s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>>> Well, parts of this are in place, viz. the activities of the nomenclators
>> Parts may be in place, but many involve massive beauracracy, and
>> equally massive backlogs. Also there is no attempt at "taxonomic
>> synthesis" by nomenclators and the like, they are really just, well,
>> nomenclators! Wikispecies, on the other hand, is quick, free, easy,
>> and synthetic!
>>
>> Also, Jim said that "nothing" was worse than bad information! A sort
>> of "fate worse than a fate worse than death!" Definitely a moot point,
>> I would say ...
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>> Quoting Tony.Rees at csiro.au:
>>
>>> Patrick LaFolette wrote:
>>>
>>>> My ideal PUTNI tool would include links to bibliographic citation and
>>>> taxonomic heirarchy, cut and paste from digital page and plate
>>>> images, OCR, translation assistance, the ability to code taxonomic
>>>> acts and errors, add notes and keywords, and link from the synonymy
>>>> items to the PUTNIs they indicate.
>>>
>>> Well, parts of this are in place, viz. the activities of the
>>> nomenclators, e.g. at genus level,
>>> http://uio.mbl.edu/NomenclatorZoologicus/ and
>>> http://botany.si.edu/ing/ , at species level the work of Index
>>> Fungorum and others, while for original literature see e.g.
>>> http://www.animalbase.uni-goettingen.de/ and the BHL. Also ZooBank
>>> intends to be a registry of much of this stuff. The current thinking
>>> for establishing the relevant linkages is presumably in the realm of
>>> the upcoming GNA, for which I leave e.g. David Remsen to comment
>>> further...
>>>
>>> Regards - Tony
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Read
>>> Sent: Friday, 14 August 2009 11:49 AM
>>> To: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Wikispecies is not a database: part 3 (after
>>> thinkingabout it!)
>>>
>>> Once upon a time Syngraph was developed by Adorian Ardelean to help with
>>> part of that PUTNI (or applied name) organizing & distilling. It's still
>>> there I see. I didn't know one could easily connect it to an existing
>>> relational database - but apparently so ....   I might give it another try
>>> sometime!
>>>
>>> http://web.nhm.ku.edu/inverts/syngraph/beta/index.htm
>>>
>>> Geoff
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> On 14/08/2009 at 11:36 a.m., Pat LaFollette <pat at lafollette.com> wrote:
>>>> You are not the only one thinking about this.  I've even coined the
>>>> seemingly obligatory acronym: PUTNI (PUblished Taxonomic Name
>>>> Instance).  Everyone I know who does taxonomic revision or other
>>>> systematic work makes them in one form or another.  Historically, one
>>>> would take notes on file cards, or photocopy taxonomic publications,
>>>> cut up the text and plates, add citation and notes, and arrange them
>>>> systematically in notebooks.  What is needed (what I need) is a
>>>> digital analog for the scissors and tape, a standard PUTNI object and
>>>> and tools to make them.  The raw material in digital format is
>>>> becoming available on Internet Archive and Biodiversity Heritage
>>>> Library; when necessary one packs up laptop and scanner and heads to
>>>> the library.  Who makes them?  Whoever needs them to support their
>>>> own research (or a hive of worker bees if funding were
>>>> available).  How long does it take?  That really depends on the
>>>> quality and efficiency of the tools, but probably a very long
>>>> time.  On the up-side, if done properly, it only needs to be done
>>>> once for each taxonomic work or group.
>>>>
>>>> My ideal PUTNI tool would include links to bibliographic citation and
>>>> taxonomic heirarchy, cut and paste from digital page and plate
>>>> images, OCR, translation assistance, the ability to code taxonomic
>>>> acts and errors, add notes and keywords, and link from the synonymy
>>>> items to the PUTNIs they indicate.
>>>>
>>>> Patrick LaFollette
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>
>>> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either
>>> of these methods:
>>>
>>> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
>>> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>
>>> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either
>>> of these methods:
>>>
>>> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
>>> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>
>> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either  
>> of these methods:
>>
>> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Or (2) a Google search specified as:  
>>  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>>
>
>
>
> --
> _________________
> Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~
> http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft
> ... in pursuit of the meaning of leaf ...
> ... 'All is leaf' ('Alles ist Blatt') - Goethe
>

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.