Hi David,
We moved terms to DWC, but still accept old terms names as alternative names, so old names will be mapped to the new DWC term.
https://github.com/gbif/dwc-api/blob/master/src/main/java/org/gbif/dwc/terms... https://github.com/gbif/dwc-api/blob/master/src/main/java/org/gbif/dwc/terms...
Best regards, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Nikolay Volik - GBIF Software Developer - nvolik@gbif.orgmailto:nvolik@gbif.org Global Biodiversity Information Facility http://www.gbif.org/ GBIF Secretariat, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark Mob: +45 503 502 70 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: API-users api-users-bounces@lists.gbif.org on behalf of Shorthouse, David davidpshorthouse@gmail.com Date: Friday, 28 January 2022 at 17:11 To: api-users@lists.gbif.org api-users@lists.gbif.org Subject: [API-users] recordedByID, identifiedByID, IPTs, and API Folks,
I note this new change:
**************** 3) The terms Recorded By ID, Identified By ID and Subgenus are now part of Darwin Core, and move from a GBIF namespace to the TDWG namespace. (The change is visible in meta.xml files of Darwin Core Archive downloads, and on verbatim occurrence records.) ****************
What happens if a data provider has either not updated the core/extensions in their IPT or are producing a DwC-A on their own? If their meta.xml continues to use the GBIF namespace for what will soon be a DwC namespace for their mapped recordedByID or identifiedByID terms, will the content in these be silently ignored when processed at GBIF's end? If this is the case, does GBIF have a mechanism to fan out communications to all affected data providers such that they can immediately update their IPTs &/or adjust how their meta.xml files are produced & then republish their datasets?
Thanks,
David Shorthouse _______________________________________________ API-users mailing list API-users@lists.gbif.org https://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users