David Remsen (GBIF)
dremsen at gbif.org
Tue Sep 15 02:52:34 CDT 2009
Parser output aside (I suspect the 'epitheton' component is a problem
with the output XML and inadvertant) blaming globalnames.org for the
orthography of the names is a bit like shooting the messenger.
Unless the input has been scrambled, the names in the index are
actually tied to specimens, observations, data records and
publications that are published and indexed via the site. As Tony
alluded, many of these records are published through GBIF's network
and represent values that curators of specimen and observation
databases have stored in their systems. The site provides a very
simple means to publicise a particular data record tied to a taxon
name. This makes it easy to obtain links to that record and gives us
a chance to evaluate the scope of orthography actually in use.
If this reveals there is a serious mess with something as
straightforward as correctly recording a name it might give some
rationale for putting resources into authoritative nomenclatural
systems like ZooBank and Index Fungorum and building tools for linking
On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:59 AM, <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
<dipteryx at freeler.nl> wrote:
> Van: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu namens Wolfgang Lorenz
> Verzonden: zo 13-9-2009 22:47
>> [...] not
>> deterred but rather attracted by warnings like "The primary users
>> of this
>> site are not people, but other machines, so please don't complain
>> the site is boring".
>> So, shouldn't we also risk a look? Maybe some more sensations
>> hiding there?
> There is also the novelty of having a "genus epitheton" for every
> These must be some very strange machines that are doing the
> reading ...
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> 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
More information about the Taxacom