ProcedureStepType: effect of invoking a protocol.

[Peter McCartney]

Ok, putting aside the element name issure, you really have something here.
You were supposed to be able to do this:

<methodStep>
 <substep>
  <description>I selected the largest nodule within the
quadrat.</description>
 </substep>
 <substep>
  <description> I tapped the nodule with a 22 oz hammer following
instructions in protocol x.</description>
  <protocol id = "x">
   <title/>
   <creator/>
   <proceduralStep>
    <description>Stand the nodule on end, and tap it sharply with a
blunt object.</description>
   </proceduralStep>
  </protocol>
 </substep>
 <substep>
  <description>I rinsed the resulting fragments in dilute hydrochloric
acid.</description>
 </substep>
</methodStep>

The reason you can't is because methodStep is messed up. It now reads
(description | (protocl | citation)) but it should be:
(description,(protocol | citation)*

This requires a description with every step and optionally allows inclusion
of protocol or citation. (mind you that if the protocol is very lengthy and
is online, what you include here might only be the info needed to indentify
and locate that document, rather than the entire document itself - in other
words, just the resource level info).




Peter McCartney (peter.mccartney at asu.edu)
Center for Environmental Studies
Arizona State University
480-965-6791 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Bergsma [mailto:tbergsma at kbs.msu.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2002 8:06 AM
> To: Peter McCartney; David Blankman; Eml-Dev (E-mail)
> Subject: ProcedureStepType: effect of invoking a protocol.
> 
> 
> Peter, David, others interested:
> 
> I think that within ProcedureStepType, the choice of (description or
> (citation or protocol)) should be a sequence of description 
> and optional
> (citation or protocol).  Here's why.
> 
> To document the use of a protocol within a procedureStepType, 
> it may be
> necessary (and may improve clarity) to provide a statement of
> invocation, optionally qualifying the manner in which the protocol was
> invoked.  Currently this is not possible, because the choice 
> of protocol
> *replaces*, rather than qualifies, all other elements in the step.
> 
> For example,  suppose I am reporting my methods for a paleo-floristic
> survey of a fossil pit.  I have a protocol x that specifies how to
> release a fossil from a fossil-bearing nodule:
> 
> <protocol id = "x">
>  <title/>
>  <creator/>
>  <proceduralStep>
>   <description>Stand the nodule on end, and tap it sharply 
> with a blunt
> object.</description>
>  </proceduralStep>
> </protocol>
> 
> Now, what I actually did is as follows:
> 
> <method(Step)>
>  <(sub)step>
>   <description>I selected the largest nodule within the
> quadrat</description>
>  </(sub)step>
>  <(sub)step>
>   <description>I stood the nodule on end and tapped it with a 22 oz.
> ball-peen hammer.</description>
>  </(sub)step>
>  <(sub)step>
>   <description>I rinsed the resulting fragments in dilute hydrochloric
> acid.</description>
>  </(sub)step>
> </method(Step)>
> 
> 
> Since I have a protocol for the second step, I could have invoked it
> thus:
> 
> <method(Step)>
>  <(sub)step>
>   <description>I selected the largest nodule within the
> quadrat.</description>
>  </(sub)step>
>  <(sub)step>
>   <protocol id = "x">
>    <title/>
>    <creator/>
>    <proceduralStep>
>     <description>Stand the nodule on end, and tap it sharply with a
> blunt object.</description>
>    </proceduralStep>
>   </protocol>
>  </(sub)step>
>  <(sub)step>
>   <description>I rinsed the resulting fragments in dilute hydrochloric
> acid.</description>
>  </(sub)step>
> </method(Step)>
> 
> Now, if I display the interesting parts on a web page (these are meant
> to be read), I get:
> 
> 1.  I selected the largest nodule within the quadrat.
> 2.  Stand the nodule on end, and tap it sharply with a blunt object.
> 3.  I rinsed the resulting fragments in dilute hydrochloric acid.
> 
> Note the abrupt change in mood (declarative to imperative) as well as
> the fact that the hammer details are lost.  My point is that 
> I should be
> able (required?) to declare that I invoked the protocol, and 
> to provide
> any qualifying details:
> 
> <description>I executed protocol x, attached, using a 22 oz. ball-peen
> hammer.</description>
> 
> If it were a *protocol* that deferred to a protocol, you might not
> notice a change in mood, but you could still have the problem of
> where-to-put-the-qualifications.
> 
> Please comment.
> 
> Tim.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Tim Bergsma
> LTER Information Manager
> W.K. Kellogg Biological Station
> Michigan State University
> Hickory Corners, MI   49060
> 616/671-2337
> tbergsma at kbs.msu.edu
> http://lter.kbs.msu.edu
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20021010/23d475c7/attachment.htm