[tcs-lc] Minor modifications prior TDWG ratification vote

[Nozomi Ytow]

Dear all,

as TDWG 2005 buisiness meeting participants know, TCS 1.00 is approved
to reccomend for TDWG ratification vote.  We can make minor
modifications sufficiently prior to the ratification vote to be closed
by 17th October 12:00 GMT.  Line between major and minor it bit
uncertain, but such as addition of new enumeration is an exapmle of
minor modification.  Since we have very short time for modification, 
I'd like to pick "could be major" issues.

Amongst issues raised in TCS meeting at St. Petersburg would be
reported by Jessie or Roger, what could be fall boundary between minor
and major is "whear could we put incertae sedis information?".  Since
incertae sedis is a status of relationship  between a taxon and its
ungiven higher taxon, one possible implementation is addition of
"incertae sedis" relationship type to enumeration and make
Relationship/ToTaxonConcept minOccurs zero. Another way is to
implement as a status of TaxonConcept, parhaps by adding a boolean
attribute to TaxonConcept.  

Another "could be major" raised is addition of "other" (or
"unapplicable" or whatever) relationship type to pass regeression
test, i.e. export from and inport to the same data strubutre via TCS.
If data provide has a relationship type not listed in the 
enumeration, the draft schema does not allow to express it so
the schema would fail regresstion test.  Even with "other"
relationship type, providers can't differenciate two or more
relationship types in ther data, so we need an optional  modifier
to put these subtypes.  See item 0000011 on Roger's tracker at
http://tracker.hyam.net/view.php?id=11  
It would be necessary to state clearly in the schema that the subtype
may be ignored if relationship type is other than "other".

Any comment, preference?

Cheers,
JMS
--
Dr. Nozomi "James" Ytow
Institute of Biological Sciences / Gene research center
University of Tsukuba
Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8572
Japan