Richard L. Pyle

I guess I'm a little confused. Throughout most of DwC information is captured in one place, not multiple places. We're talking about a relationship between a specimen and a scientificName,...

@mdoering : OK, fair points! I just wanted to make sure I understood. So am I correct that the problem is that people represent type specimens with names that are...

@mdoering : > I wonder how common that is. I had always assumed that every Museum worked this way; but maybe not? Also, despite what I write below, the closest...

OK, we seem to be discussing two things: 1. How to model this stuff in an ideal way (i.e., whether or not typeStatus/typification are facts about names/specimens, or assertions about...

Well... those are the definitions that are in my head now -- not necessarily the definitions that were in my head when I provided those terms to @tucotuco back when...

@qgroom : Ah! Sorry for my misunderstanding, and I see your point. People will no doubt confuse the value shown in `typifiedName` as being the name of the Identified organism....

I *strongly* believe that `MaterialCitation` should not be constrained to "published" (*sensu stricto*) works -- in part because the definition of "published" is highly ambiguous, and in part because there...

Thanks, @debpaul ! Yeah, from my perspective, it's actually all grey -- just different shades.

> Expanding the definition and examples of `MaterialCitation` works for me as well. Would it work for Plazi? I know that @myrmoteras [expressed an intention](https://github.com/tdwg/dwc/issues/329#issuecomment-894325931) to restrict it to "published"...

Thanks, @myrmoteras ! Could you provide a definition for "scholarly publications" as it applies to `MateiralCitation`? Is peer review required? If so, how would peer review be defined? Or, would...