Richard L. Pyle

I wrote a big-long reply, full of wit and snark and all the usual stuff, then managed to close my browser before clicking the "Comment" button. I'll cut to the...

If all are fine with the non-normative change proposed by @timrobertson100, I can live with that solution as well. However, I am very strongly in favor of the original direction...

> I fail to see how the data model comes into it, or how anything @timrobertson100 suggested goes against the "bigger dream" of "Darwin core as a true information model...

Apologies to all creating this as a new issue. As @tucotuco noted, the *only* proposal was to move the term from the `Occurrence` class to the `MaterialSample` class (everything else...

OK, thanks for the clarification, @tucotuco !

See my [comment on the issue](https://github.com/tdwg/dwc/issues/45) for the proposed new term `tribe`.

I'm certainly in favor of aligning the definitions of the two terms. I'm generally in favor of the proposal @mdoering suggest for modifying `originalNameUsage` to match the meaning of `originalNameUsageID`....

> I thought it is simpler to leave the originalNameUsageID term as it is, thats why such a comment is not present there. Ah! That makes sense, But in order...

> If I understand [article 58 of the code](https://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/pages/main/art_58.html) correctly that is actually not the case. It would simply be Xus cus Pyle and priority for cus starts with the...

There was discussion on the dwc:MaterialCitation thread whether the scope of sources should be limited only to "scholarly publications", or to any form of "Reference" (=document source *sensu lato*) --...