Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add material core to sandbox #105

Closed
timrobertson100 opened this issue Apr 26, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

Add material core to sandbox #105

timrobertson100 opened this issue Apr 26, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@timrobertson100
Copy link
Member

timrobertson100 commented Apr 26, 2023

In the SPNCH workshop we will have a hands-on exercise to map data. One track of that will be mapping Material to Darwin Core Archives in the Sandbox (another to a Frictionless model which is yet to be defined).

To bring DwC-A closer to the work on the model, we'd like to introduce a Material core to use instead of Occurrence which is a layer of confusion. This resurrects and will replace previous ideas with the MaterialSample core which never made it to production.

This will be largely similar to Occurrence core, but removing those fields NOT specific to Material.

@tucotuco - can you please confirm Material and materialID as the preference over the MaterialSample terminology current in DwC, knowing it will align better with the forthcoming model?

@tucotuco
Copy link
Collaborator

Confirmed to use Material and materialID for this.

Clarification, do you mean, "This will be largely similar to Occurrence core, but removing those fields NOT specific to Material"?

@timrobertson100
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks - corrected

@dagendresen
Copy link

Notice that MaterialEntity and materialEntityID are close to be proposed

@tucotuco
Copy link
Collaborator

@timrobertson100 We may save ourselves some hassle by going with MaterialEntity and aligning with the Task Group proposal. There were arguments against Material as being both a noun and an adjective and therefore potentially confusing or misleading.

@timrobertson100
Copy link
Member Author

Available in the sandbox and the issue linked above captures the need for IPT v3 support

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants