Quentin Groom

What is the downside to aligning these ranks with those suggested in the codes of nomenclature, such as the ICN ([https://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/pages/main/art_4.html?zoom_highlight=ranks](https://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/pages/main/art_4.html?zoom_highlight=ranks))? Clearly this would require an expansion in the number...

@nielsklazenga All of your definitions need to refer to a specific time and place, but particularly `absent`. `doubtful` can apply to one period and not another in the same location...

There is certainly a need for this and nomenclatural information like this are certainly under worked. Why not add typifiedName to the TypesAndSpecimen extension? currently it has scientificName included, which...

This is a bit of an aside, but all this discussion makes me pity the person just trying to publish their specimen data. So much of what has been written...

@deepreef Couldn't we put your explanations of `scientificName`, `acceptedNameUsage` and `originalNameUsage` into the comments of the Darwin Core terms? We need to capture this for the average user. @tucotuco should...

@mdoering @deepreef I'm not saying `typifiedName` should not go in dwc:Identification, but once you add a taxonomic name to this class people are not going to know where the identified...

Related issue #391

I think it should say that the name "`...should be compliant to the most recent nomenclatural code`". Citations of the codes would not be harmful and some details would be...

I don't see what the difference is between MaterialCitation and MaterialMention. Effectively they mean the same thing.

linked to issue https://github.com/tdwg/dwc/issues/388