[API-users] What happens to previous data after dataset/crawl?

Herbario SANT sant.herbarium at gmail.com
Sun Aug 28 16:00:57 CEST 2016


Hi

I take the opportunity to ask about the difference between two GBIF terms:

What is the difference of "occurrenceID" compared to "identifier"?  Both
have the same value in this dataset:
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/1291766512/verbatim
http://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/1291766512

I see "occurrenceID" well explained here:
http://gbif.blogspot.com.es/2014/04/ipt-v21.html
http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/#occurrenceID

But I can't find the explanation for "identifier", which I think some
institutions have been incorrectly understanding as "occurrenceID".
For example:
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/142907792/verbatim
http://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/142907792

There is an "identifier" in that occurrence, but no "occurrenceID".
1) What is exactly the meaning of that "identifier"?  Why is it not
explained in dwc terms page?
2) What happens if the data provider keeps all data UNCHANGED, but adds the
"occurrenceID" which was missing?
    Would next GBIF reindex keep the same number of records and add their
occurrenceIDs? (perhaps looking at the triplet in that "identifier"?)
    Would later on be safe to change any fields in the dataset (even
"identifier", "catalognumber", ...) if that data provider keeps those
occurrenceIDs stable?

Thanks


On 27 August 2016 at 08:01, Roderic Page <Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk> wrote:

> Just wanted to check the consequences of the following dataset operation.
>
> Say I have a dataset with 10 occurrences with occurrence ids 1-10. In my
> local database I now assign those 10 occurrences new identifiers a-j. If I
> create a new DwCA file for my data and crawl the new archive, my
> expectation is:
>
> 1. Old data with ids 1-10 is deleted from GBIF index
> 2. New data with ids a-j is indexed
>
> So, end result is dataset has 10 occurrences. I'm asking because I know in
> the past the some datasets have changed identifiers and this has resulted
> in records with old and new identifiers coexisting in GBIF index, resulting
> in duplicated data.
>
> Obviously it would be nice to have stable, unchanging identifiers for
> occurrences, but the for data set I'm working with the creators have
> changed their minds between versions of the data :(
>
> Regards,
>
> Rod
>
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> API-users mailing list
> API-users at lists.gbif.org
> http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users
>
>


-- 
David García San León
Herbario SANT
Facultade de Farmacia - Laboratorio de Botánica
Universidade de Santiago de Compostela
15782 - Galicia (Spain)
http://www.usc.es/herbario
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gbif.org/pipermail/api-users/attachments/20160828/f47a572e/attachment.html>


More information about the API-users mailing list