Teleconference 26/27 May 2020

[nielsklazenga]

There will be two meetings within a 24-hour period to hopefully suit people in all parts of the world, one on 26 May at 21:00 UTC and one on 27 May at 8:00 UTC. I hope Australians will join me at both meetings.

Meeting invitation will follow.

We will talk about procedure, following recent discussions in issue #12 and #52. I will try to have both a draft for the front README of the repository and the TDWG website and a straw man for a charter ready. If time allows we can also discuss other things that have come up (I am planning to put in some more issues between now and then).

[nielsklazenga]

Invitations for these meetings have gone out by email. Core members will have had them. If you are not a core member (yet) and want to join us in one of the meetings, please send me an email (my email address is in the README at the front of this repository) and I will forward the invitation.

[jar398]

Minutes?

[deepreef]

So... I (finally) got around to generating a dataset extracted from Linneaus 1758 (it takes a while to load if you click the link -- lotsa names) for @jar398 (again, my apologies for the delay). For "fun", I decided to structure the output following the draft terms document we've been working on. This turned out to be a useful exercise because it forced me to map all the GNUB fields to the terms. I bumped into a number of issues along the way (some small, some maybe not so small). It still feels like fingernails on a chalkboard to me to treat TaxonomicName and TaxonomicNameUsage as separate classes (the former does not exist except in the context of the latter). But remembering that this is an effort to establish an exchange standard (not a data model) serves the function of semi-effective earplugs to render the screeching sound of the fingernails and chalkboard more tolerable to my (perhaps overly?) sensitive metaphorical ears.

In any case, I'd be happy to share the output file with this group if interested -- but I'm a total GitHub Noob, so not sure the exact protocol/etiquette for doing so (or perhaps @jar398 can share it).

But more importantly, I'm not sure how best to summarize the issues I encountered during this process. Should I generate a whole smattering of new issues for each particular set of issues I encountered? Or should I add them as comments/markup to the draft terms document? Or, should I just address them during the next Teleconference (hence the posting to this particular issue)? Or some combination?

I defer to the GitHub pros in how best to approach this.

[nielsklazenga]

Minutes are on the Wiki now.

@jar398 Thanks for the reminder.

[nielsklazenga]

Thanks @deepreef , I will be very interested to see what issues you've come up with. Let's discuss dissemination next week. I will add an 'Other business' item to the agenda.

[mdoering]

Hi Rich, I am too very interested to hear about your problems. If github issues are the way to go I would advocate a single issue per problem so you dont mix discussions but keep focused on a single problem. But you can also create a single parent issue with "ZooBank TNC mapping problems". That then lets us single out individual problems which we can create new issues for and keep them linked. On 11. Jun 2020, at 04:12, Niels Klazenga <notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com>> wrote: Thanks @deepreef<https://github.com/deepreef> , I will be very interested to see what issues you've come up with. Let's discuss dissemination next week. I will add an 'Other business' item to the agenda. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#53 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACP6UL2WC7TRVLSXF7UU4DRWA4PPANCNFSM4NERG4TQ>.

[deepreef]

OK, thanks @nielsklazenga and @mdoering

I think what I'll do is add comments to the Google Doc, because that's something I'm familiar with, then we can decide which of the things I describe should be raised as an issue in GitHub. I'll drop another post here when I'm done (not because it's the right place to do so, but because this is where we're discussing it).