TG2-VALIDATION_DCTYPE_NOTEMPTY

[iDigBioBot]

TestField	Value
GUID	374b091a-fc90-4791-91e5-c1557c649169
Label	VALIDATION_DCTYPE_NOTEMPTY
Description	Is there a value in dc:type?
TestType	Validation
Darwin Core Class	Record-level
Information Elements ActedUpon	dc:type
Information Elements Consulted
Expected Response	COMPLIANT if dc:type is bdq:NotEmpty; otherwise NOT_COMPLIANT
Data Quality Dimension	Completeness
Term-Actions	DCTYPE_NOTEMPTY
Parameter(s)
Source Authority
Specification Last Updated	2023-09-18
Examples	[dc:type="?": Response.status=RUN_HAS_RESULT, Response.result=COMPLIANT, Response.comment="dc:type is bdq:NotEmpty"]
	[dc:type=" ": Response.status=RUN_HAS_RESULT, Response.result=NOT_COMPLIANT, Response.comment="dc:type is bdq:Empty"]
Source	TG2
References	Dublin Core (2012) DCMI Type Vocabulary. https://www.dublincore.org/specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-type-vocabulary/
Example Implementations (Mechanisms)
Link to Specification Source Code
Notes

[iDigBioBot]

Comment by Lee Belbin (@Tasilee) migrated from spreadsheet: Added post scoring for consistency

[godfoder]

This is going to flag a lot of records.

[ArthurChapman]

This has been labelled non-core, but discussions at Gainesville suggested it was a good test. We disn't disscuss Sunday TDWG208 - should we re-install or not?

[chicoreus]

One argument for imposing an expectation that dcterms:type (populated with IRIs from DCMI Type Vocabulary) or dc:type (populated with string literals) be non-empty is that this term helps make occurrence data more broadly reusable in other communities. See the table in the TDWG RDF guide: http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/guides/rdf/index.htm#3.3_Imported_Dublin_Core_terms_that_have_non-literal_objects_and

A second argument (that @ pzermoglio made this evening) is that populating basisOfRecord entails an expectation that dc:type will be popluated with an appropriate parallel value. These are likely to be important discriminators for the nature of vouchers, particularly of observations, where dc:type may contain key information about the nature (image, video, audio) of the voucher.

On this basis, I'd advocate including a test for whether dc:type is empty in core.

[Tasilee]

Thanks @chicoreus. Subsequent discussions within the core group (!) support your conclusion.

[Tasilee]

Splitting bdqffdq:Information Elements into "Information Elements ActedUpon" and "Information Elements Consulted".

Also changed "Field" to "TestField", "Output Type" to "TestType" and updated "Specification Last Updated"