[tcs-lc] Unnecessary vernacular relationship types?

Richard Pyle deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Fri Sep 23 17:43:11 PDT 2005


> Disagree.  We have ranked vernacular names as standard Japanese names
> of taxa, and TaxonName (or NameObject still?) is not place for
> vernacular names.

I don't see this as justification for having an element that contains the
same information (in the vast majority of cases) in two separate places in
the schema.  If Japanese vernacular names have formal ranks, then maybe they
should be treated as NameObjects (TaxonNames?), or maybe they should have
their own sub-structure comparable to NameObject/TaxonName/LC.

Aloha,
Rich




More information about the Tcs-lc mailing list