[Taxacom] Ebbe Nielsen Challenge submission

Paul J. Morris mole at morris.net
Fri Sep 7 10:37:54 CDT 2018

On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 08:38:46 -0400
"Shorthouse, David" <davidpshorthouse at gmail.com> wrote:
> In theory, a mass collecting
> machine and a mass identification machine could have an ORCID or other
> identifier

There is currently one entry in the Harvard List of Botanists for a software agent ( http://purl.oclc.org/net/edu.harvard.huh/guid/uuid/1f9d72fd-c9bf-45c6-bca0-7fe2dcc0da5f ), this one happens to be a software agent that created database records rather than made collections or determinations, but no changes would need to be made to the schema to add a software agent that made determinations and link it to determinations as any other botanist.

> such that if we had the desire to, we could differentiate
> human vs. machine instead of attempting to do this via strings of text
> as we do now 

The rdf representation of entries in the Harvard List of Botanists uses foaf, and in the absence of a specific foaf type for software the software agent is typed as a foaf:Agent (in distinction to the other records which are typed as foaf:Person, foaf:Group, or foaf:Organization), so something would still need to be added to answer the competency question "select all occurrences identified by a software agent".

>Are the Darwin Core terms
>identifiedBy and recordedBy appropriate? 

If the definitions were extended to include software agents, then
dwciri:identifiedBy and dwciri:recordedBy would seem entirely
appropriate to carry the identifiers of software agents that are
determiners, observers, or collectors. See:

Paul J. Morris
Biodiversity Informatics Manager
Museum of Comparative Zo├Âlogy, Harvard University
mole at morris.net  AA3SD  PGP public key available

More information about the Taxacom mailing list