[tcs-lc] Re: name and concept <sigh>

[Nozomi Ytow]

> I'm not sure I understand.  Maybe we can communicate more effectively via
> XML?

It would look like:

<TaxonConcepts>
  <TaxonConcept id="TC1" type="nomenclatural">
    <Name type="scientific" nomencode="ICBN">
      <NameSimple>Ambiregnalus namus</NameSimple>
    </Name>
    <Relationships>
      <Relationship type="is ambiregnal of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC2"/>
      </Relationship>
      <Relationship type="is congruent to">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC0"/>
      </Relationship>
    </Relationships>
  </TaxonConcept>
  <TaxonConcept id="TC2" type="nomenclatural">
    <Name type="scientific" nomencode="ICZN">
      <NameSimple>Ambiregnalus namus</NameSimple>
    </Name>
    <Relationships>
      <Relationship type="is ambiregnal of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC1"/>
      </Relationship>
      <Relationship type="is congruent to">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC0"/>
      </Relationship>
    </Relationships>
  </TaxonConcept>
  <TaxonConcept id="TC0" type="original">
    <Name type="scientific">
      <NameSimple/>
    </Name>
    <SpecimenCircumscription>
      <CircumscribedBy ref="someSpecimenID" type="holotype"/>
      <CircumscribedBy ref="anotherSpecimenID"/>
    </SpecimenCircumscription>
    <CharacterCircumscription/>
  </TaxonConcept>
</TaxonConcepts>

Single name literal, two name usages (one ICZN, one ICBN), three
TaxonConcepts, one origial and to nomenclatural.
CharacterCircumscription may be filled by something.
What will happen on genus Ambiregnalus?

<TaxonConcepts>
  <TaxonConcept id="TC11" type="nomenclatural">
    <Name type="scientific" nomencode="ICBN">
      <NameSimple>Ambiregnalus</NameSimple>
    </Name>
    <Relationships>
      <Relationship type="is ambiregnal of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC12"/>
      </Relationship>
      <Relationship type="is congruent to">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC10"/>
      </Relationship>
      <Relationship type="is parent of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC1"/>
      </Relationship>
    </Relationships>
  </TaxonConcept>
  <TaxonConcept id="TC12" type="nomenclatural">
    <Name type="scientific" nomencode="ICZN">
      <NameSimple>Ambiregnalus</NameSimple>
    </Name>
    <Relationships>
      <Relationship type="is ambiregnal of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC11"/>
      </Relationship>
      <Relationship type="is congruent to">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC10"/>
      </Relationship>
      <Relationship type="is parent of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC2"/>
      </Relationship>
    </Relationships>
  </TaxonConcept>
  <TaxonConcept id="TC10" type="original">
    <Name type="scientific">
      <NameSimple/>
    </Name>
      <Relationship type="is parent of">
        <ToTaxonConcept ref="TC0"/>
      </Relationship>
    <CharacterCircumscription/>
  </TaxonConcept>
</TaxonConcepts>


Is it right to apply congruence between a nominal TaxonConcept
and a TaxonConcept with definition elements?

JMS