[tcs-lc] nameObjects, spellings, vernaculars, etc

[Richard Pyle]

> I think we agree with pretty much everything (hurray!). It does seem
> to me that BOTH name-string-things (canonical name and verbatim name)
> belong in the LC part of the schema

But if in LC, then "verbatim of what?"  Verbatim implies a specific usage
instance.  For name objects, we would have a few "name-relevant" usages such
as the original/protologue usage, and maybe a couple other special-case,
nomenclaturally important usages. For those specific kinds of usages, I
think there should be elements within LC (e.g., "OriginalOrthography")

But the vast majority of "usages" in TCS will be concept definitions, which
go well beyond the small subset of usage instances that are of nomenclatural
(i.e., Code-relevant) significance.  Thus, TCS needs an element to contain
the VerbatimName as used by the AccordingTo authors for each Concept
Definition instance -- well outside of LC.

Now, there will be some overlap. For example, suppose Pyle describes the new
species Mygenus mispecies, but for particular reasons, the "Code-correct"
spelling should be "Mygenus myspecies".

LC would keep track of two different name-strings:

<NameObject id="N123">
  <Label>Mygenus myspecies</Label>
  <OriginalOrthography>Mygenus mispecies</OriginalOrthography>
  [...]
</NameObject>

These are both name-relevant spellings, and thus rightly belong in LC.

But, of course, Pyle also would have defined a concept circumscription to go
along with his new species, so there would also be a TaxonConcept instance:

<TaxonConcept id="TC001">
  <Name ref="N123">
    <NameVerbatim>Mygenus mispecies</NameVerbatim>
  </Name>
  <AccordingTo>
    <AccordingToSimple>Pyle</AccordingToSimple>
  </AccordingTo>
  [etc...]
</TaxonConcept>

{or something like that)

So...the point is, in this case the text string "Mygenus mispecies" would be
in there twice -- not just as two separate instances of what happens to be
the same string of characters, but literally the same piece of information
(assuming "OriginalOrthography" is defined as "Verbatim Name as used in the
protologue").

Small price to pay, I think.

> The only thing I would ask is whether, with the LC objects pulled out
> of the body of the TCS element, the TCS still needs a placeholder
> string with the _canonical_ name just for readability.

Why does it need the canonical name within the TCS instance?  Why not just
capture the Verbatim Name, then derive the Canonical from the Label element
of the linked (via "ref" attribute of Name element in TC) NameObject?

> Rich - yes, I mean scientific-name-as-spelled-by-the-author not
> author-name-as-spelled-by-the-author (the sooner you zoologists get
> the equivalent of the botanists' standard abbreviations the better!)

Swap the words 'zoologists' and 'botantists' with each other, and you'll get
a phrase I mutter to myself all the time!
:-)

Rich