[SEEK-Taxon] Thoughts on GUIDs

[Richard Pyle]

> guid() is the function that, given a concept returns its guid. Whether
> it comes from the concept instance document or the algorithm that
> assigns it ought to be immaterial.
>
> S here was meant to be the relation "isTheSameConceptAs". So in natural
> language, that expression would be the requirement that
>
>    c1 is the same concept as c2 if, and only if, their guids are identical

I don't mean to sound like Bill Clinton in trying to define the word
"is"....but in this case, I think it's important to define what we really
mean by "same concept as".  From how you describe it, I see "same concept
as" in the very strictest sense.  For example, if I have a dataset that
reports Species X from Locality Y, that dataset would need to assign
"Species X" to a particular concept GUID (of which there may be many for
"Species X"), and then that concept GUID is matched indentically to some
universal metadataset for the GUID, as well as to other datasets that
reference the same GUID.

This is a very different "same concept as" function of "S" than would be
another core component of the SEEK model, which is to make the statement:

"Concept GUID 1234 is congruent with concept GUID 4567"

They maintain their separate GUID values because they are *potentially*
different (that is, that congruency is an interpretation, rather than an
objective statement).

>   If c3 is a synonym of c2 and c2 is a synonym of c1, then c3 is a
> synonym of c1

I take it that your use of "is a synonym of" is different from "is the same
concept as" (i.e., that c1, c2, and c3 would necessarily have different
GUIDs)?

Aloha,
Rich