davidpshorthouse at gmail.com
Mon Jan 25 19:13:53 CST 2016
If it's merely to add a bit of levity to the list, I'm all for it.
Sometimes the doing is the only necessary philosophy, much like how
cell phones & texting have replaced planning to meet at a particular
time and place.
Anyhow, it's been 10 years. Why have some original data sources & APIs
evaporated (Yahoo) & has "search" improved for those that remain in
any measurable way (GBIF)?
On Jan 25, 2016, at 7:46 PM, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rod,
> Obviously there is a conceptual link from your original iSpecies to the
> birth and continued development of EOL which is arguably the original
> iSpecies concept extended a lot further, with links to multiple taxonomies,
> wikipedia articles, maps from many sources, BHL etc. etc. So I'm not clear
> why you would reactivate iSpecies unless it is to prototype some aspects
> you feel EOL is not currently covering (or could not, with a few well
> placed suggestions). So I guess I am more interested in the philosophy of
> what you are doing than the current realization as per the web site (which
> is easy to criticise versus e.g. the equivalent pages on EOL). More info,
> please! (and yes, I did see the iPhylo blog post).
> Regards - Tony
> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Celebrating 29 years of Taxacom in 2016.
More information about the Taxacom