[Taxacom] GBIF: perpetuating probably defunct unpublished names
jim.croft at gmail.com
Sun May 23 09:11:03 CDT 2010
meanwhile, over in twitterspace, David Shorthouse has posted a link to
@dpsSpiders Excellent criticism of EOL: http://bit.ly/ch0JX4
which expands to:
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 9:57 PM, Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au> wrote:
> David Remsen wrote:
> "What should the practice be for someone who wants to taxonomically validate their collections data prior to publishing their data via GBIF?"
> IMO a major problem is that providers haven't always *wanted* to validate. The aggregators asked for data, and the providers offered it up uncleaned. Not only taxonomically inconsistent, but spatially doubtful. I won't name names, but one provider told me 'The important thing is to get the data up and online, we can worry about cleaning it later. The [aggregator] has time and money to do this, we don't.'
> Ken Walker wrote:
> "I am beginning to wonder whether discrete taxon treatment websites are indeed better than those that attempt to do all."
> How could it be otherwise?
> Dr Robert Mesibov
> Honorary Research Associate
> Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
> School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
> Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
> 03 64371195; 61 3 64371195
> Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/mesibov.html
> 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
Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point
of doubtful sanity.'
- Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963)
More information about the Taxacom