Now the RT s linked to the sci. taxonomic name in the former hierarchy are linked to the common name, which in turn linked to the sci. tax. name. Is it alright?
Thursday, September 11, 2008
RT refinement - Issue no. 3
In existing AGROVOC, Sci. Taxonomic name and Common name are related by Use-UF relations. While revising, the common name is made descriptor and made an RT to the Sci. Taxonomic name.
Now the RT s linked to the sci. taxonomic name in the former hierarchy are linked to the common name, which in turn linked to the sci. tax. name. Is it alright?
Now the RT s linked to the sci. taxonomic name in the former hierarchy are linked to the common name, which in turn linked to the sci. tax. name. Is it alright?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Concerning this sentence:
"Sci. Taxonomic name and Common name are related by Use-UF relations. While revising, the common name is made descriptor and made an RT to the Sci. Taxonomic name". --> this is correct for the MOST USED common name. All others common names (or local names if any) will remain non-descriptors.
Concerning this question:
"Now the RT s linked to the sci. taxonomic name in the former hierarchy are linked to the common name, which in turn linked to the sci. tax. name. Is it alright?"
I am not sure i understood all, but:
RT can remain to the scientific name if they involve the scientific name.
You can move them to the common name only if needed, only if this makes more sense.
No need of course to duplicate them (same RT from sc.taxo-name and from the common-name .... this is not needed).
If I well understand from the picture you want to change the relationships "Vitellaria paradoxa UF Shea (tree)" to "Vitellaria paradoxa RT Shea (tree)". Is this what you want to do?
This is correct only if "Shea (tree)" is not the same as "Vitellaria paradoxa". If they are the same, it is correct to keep "Vitellaria paradoxa UF Shea (tree)".
Also: if "Shea (tree)" is not the same as "Vitellaria paradoxa", you have to create "Shea (tree)" as new descriptor, make RT to "Vitellaria paradoxa" (refine as ...) and you need to give a BT to "Shea (tree)".
Then i understand that you want to create 2 new relationships from:
- Shea nuts RT(isProducedBy) "Shea (tree)"
- Oil crops RT(isMemberOf) "Shea (tree)"
the first one is ok. But second is not isMemberOf. Should be something like "isDerivedFrom" because (maybe) "Oil crops isDerivedFrom Shea (tree)" ...
Look at the definition of "isDerivedFrom" here http://agrovoc.icrisat.ac.in/agrovoc/relations.php?=&myRTid=230&myLanguage=EN
X isDerivedFrom Y. A substance or product X obtained exclusively from source Y without any additional substance or product. E.g. "cow milk" isDerivedFrom "cow"; "plant oil" isDerivedFrom "plant"; "olive wood" isDerivedFrom "olive tree"; "chicken meat" isDerivedFrom "chicken"; but NOT "beer" isDerivedFrom "hops" (see madeFrom);
Also, if you put the RT to Shea nuts and Oil crops to "Shea (tree)", maybe you need to remove them from "Vitellaria paradoxa" ...
And from the picture i understand that Butyrospermum paradoxum (EN) and Butyrospermum parkii (EN) will remain non-descritors for "Vitellaria paradoxa". Ok for that.
Finally: I suggest that all terms not in english which are non-descriptors for "Vitellaria paradoxa". Will remain the same.
A taxon (often species) has one or more scientific names and one or more common names in each of the AGROVOC languages. Of these, one name must be selected as the descriptor (in a multilingual thesaurus this should be the scientific name across all languages, one could select a preferred common name for each language if the AGROVOC structure allows it). All other terms are synonyms, so scientific name RT common name is not correct.
As to producedBy vs. derivedFrom, not having seen the most recent definitions I would think it is
cow milk producedBy cow
butter derivedFrom cow milk
or
Shea nuts producedBy Vitellaria paradoxa
Shea oil derivedFrom Shea nuts
Oil crop hasMember Vitellaria paradoxa
OR
Oil crop hasMember Shea nuts
A decision must be made whether XXX crop refers to the plant taxon that produces the fruit or leaves or roots etc. from which XXX is derived or whether XXX crop refers to the actual product (fruit, leaves, root, etc.) from which XXX is derived. To give another example, does wheat crop refer to the wheat plant or to the wheat seeds produced. In English, crop could mean either and is often used in contexts where the distinction does not matter.
Thanks Dagobert. we have analyzed various possibilities for the problem of scientific and common names and we are soon publishing in this blog our concluding remarks with new guidelines for ICRISAT.
Post a Comment