Lee Belbin

As far as I am concerned, there are at least two bdq:sourceAuthority references here. The first is either WORMS or IRMNG and the second is GADM. A potential third may...

I agree with @chicoreus and as I have commented on #66, "I would say #36 SHOULD cover a 'not possible' date within a valid time range."

Thanks @chicoreus and @ArthurChapman: Well picked up. I will amend accordingly and would value a check.

Thanks @ArthurChapman

My consistent stance would be err on the side of caution (as long as we have a test that is considered valuable) that we flag a POTENTIAL issue (false positive)...

Oops. I agree @chicoreus. Can we get away with dwc:scientificName? Admitted, amendments may affect the taxon identity.

Thanks @chicoreus and @ArthurChapman. I agree with you @chicoreus in regards the syntax options bdq:sourceAuthority[taxonomyismarine] and bdq:sourceAuthority[geospatialland]. I think this is simpler @ArthurChapman than repeating bdq - which could get...

@chicoreus I also agree: Editing accordingly.

Seems ok to me @tucotuco. I'm happy to make the changes once we have comments from @chicoreus and @ArthurChapman. And just noticed a typo in my ER above with status...

Still not quite right. Try this... EXTERNAL_PREREQUISITES_NOT_MET if either bdq:sourceAuthority[taxonomyismarine] or bdq:sourceAuthority[geospatialland] are not available; INTERNAL_PREREQUISITES_NOT_MET if dwc:dcientificName was EMPTY or the marine/non-marine status of the taxon is not interpretable...