[API-users] Suggestion to add nomenclaturalCode to NameUsage of checklistbank

[Markus Döring]

Hi James,

you are right that the NameUsage class does not have the code property. I have created a jira request for that:
http://dev.gbif.org/issues/browse/POR-2971 <http://dev.gbif.org/issues/browse/POR-2971>


In case the source data has that term it will be available in the verbatim view of the usage though already now.
Unfortunately we have a nasty bug in our verbatim usage handling that I discovered just today. 
That requires us to reindex all checklist data first which will take quite a while before you can access the nomenclaturalCode there.
http://dev.gbif.org/issues/browse/PF-2228 <http://dev.gbif.org/issues/browse/PF-2228>

best,
Markus



> On 11 Nov 2015, at 00:22, Nozomi James Ytow <nozomi at biol.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> the subject says all.
> 
> I suspect that some data in GBIF Checklist Bank are derived from
> checklits formatted in Dawrin Core, e.g. 
> http://www.gbif.org/dataset/7a9bccd4-32fc-420e-a73b-352b92267571
> or http://data.canadensys.net/ipt/resource.do?r=coleoptera-ca-ak the source.
> DwC data may contain nomenclaturalCode whichi is crucial to explore
> name usages, especially the same literal is used under different
> nomenclatural codes.  Please consider to add nomenclaturalCode element
> (or something equivalent) to Species API response if it is available in the soure data.
> 
> Regerds,
> James
> _______________________________________________
> API-users mailing list
> API-users at lists.gbif.org
> http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gbif.org/pipermail/api-users/attachments/20151111/1239a00c/attachment.html>