[Taxacom] Species Cite: linking scientific names to publications and taxonomists

[Tony Rees]

Hi all,

I think the key (or perhaps one of the keys) to analysing what Rod has done
is to ask 2 questions:

One, has he created something that is already useful, in that it provides a
service (or product) that did not previously exist? This could be for
example in its scope (multiple groups and/or habitats), its base data used
(not previously accessible, or accessible only with difficulty), or its
capabilities (search functions, display functions, user experience). It
does not really matter at this point whether what he shows is a
proof-of-concept, or a fully populated system that will be curated into the
future (with a resourcing plan), although my suspicious is that it is some
part of a way along this continuum;

and/or:

Two, does it point to a new way of doing things, different from what is
done today by comparable systems - in other words, moving away from the
"walled garden" approach, presently successfully deployed in most current
system (WoRMS being an excellent example as mentioned above, with its own
"house style", all content under local control, etc. etc.) towards
something more interoperable and more "open" for editorship by more folk
(although of course that comes with its own issues - quality assurance,
patchy coverage, divergence of views, edit wars, etc. etc.).

At present my own systems - most notably IRMNG at this time - conform to
the "walled garden" model for convenience, but others such as Wikipedia,
Wikispecies and Wikidata do not. It will be interesting to see what may pan
out for the future, most likely when I and my more senior contemporaries
are no longer around!

Regards - Tony

Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
https://about.me/TonyRees
www.irmng.org



>
>