gbif
Explicitly set vocabularies in meta.xml are not preserved by the IPT
For several of our columns we are using the vocabularies the IPT
comes with and we explicitly advertise that fact in our source
meta.xml (for example: <field index="6"
term="http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/taxonRank"
vocabulary="http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/rank.xml"/>.) However,
when the resource is published, the archive generated by the IPT
removes this information. We think that perhaps the IPT should not
remove the vocabularies from meta.xml and maybe for those vocabularies
the IPT is aware of it should either complain when a row violates the
vocabulary or else set the column value to NULL (like the automap option
of the value translation page does?)
What version of the provider software are you using?
2.0.1
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2011-04-12 13:14:37
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2011-07-04 14:06:22
- Labels added: Milestone-Release2.0.4
- Labels removed: Milestone-Release2.0.3
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2011-11-04 09:57:22
- Labels added: Milestone-Release2.0.x
- Labels removed: Milestone-Release2.0.4
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2013-03-19 09:49:19
- Labels added: Milestone-Release2.1.X
- Labels removed: Milestone-Release2.0.x
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2014-03-19 18:21:14
- Labels added: Milestone-Release2.2.X
- Labels removed: Milestone-Release2.1.X
Issue 732 has been merged into this issue.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2014-09-08 16:04:35
Relates to Issue 979, included in 2.2 therefore could try to include also
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2014-09-08 16:06:05
- Labels added: Milestone-Release2.2
- Labels removed: Milestone-Release2.2.X
Deferred to 2.3 or later
Original issue reported on code.google.com by kyle.braak on 2014-12-05 13:32:53
- Labels added: Milestone-Release2.3
- Labels removed: Milestone-Release2.2
@cgendreau thank you for fixing dwca-io#16. It would certainly be a nice improvement if the IPT could set the right vocabulary used for a term when applicable.
Unfortunately dwca-io#16 isn't fixed yet.
That means this enhancement has to be moved to the next release.
Patch attached that can be used to incorporate this enhancement when the fix in dwca-io is ready. Patch#667.patch.zip
Setting the vocabulary when known is a great addition! I would just refrain from removing deviating values. It might be additions not yet in the vocabulary and GBIF also has a large number of synonymous terms in the parsing libraries for those cases.
