Skip to content

Remove traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType property #206

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 21, 2022
Merged

Remove traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType property #206

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
2727b32
change traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType property
nielsklazenga Nov 7, 2022
e969110
Remove traditionalTaxonomyRelationshipType
nielsklazenga Nov 11, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions docs/tcs-terms.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -586,19 +586,19 @@ files.
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td><b>required:</b> Yes — <b>repeatable:</b> No</td>
<td><b>required:</b> No — <b>repeatable:</b> No</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Definition</td>
<td><p>Type of relationship that is used in traditional synonymy, e.g. 'pro parte synonym' or 'misapplication'.</p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Comments</td>
<td><p>This is an IRI term. One should use a value from the TDWG Taxon Concept Relationship Type Vocabulary. In the case of Taxon Concept Relationships from traditional synonymy, the <code>relationshipAccordingTo</code> is the same as the <code>accordingTo</code> of the Taxon Concept that is the <code>subjectTaxonConcept</code>.</p></td>
<td><p>This term should be used together with <code>relationshipType</code> (which is required anyway). Generally, the value of <code>relationshipType</code> will be <code>intersects</code> if this property is used.</p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GitHub issue</td>
<td>https://github.com/tdwg/tcs2/issues/200</td>
<td>https://github.com/tdwg/tcs2/issues/205</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
Expand Down
39 changes: 7 additions & 32 deletions master/tcs.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -161,15 +161,12 @@
Concept is required. Therefore, `synonym` is a property of the Taxon Concept
class. `synonym` is used here in the stricter sense that only indicates that
the type of a name falls within a Taxon Concept and has the same
relationship to Taxon Concept as `taxonName`. This allows one to dispose of
names without having to deal with the Taxon Concepts that were realised
along with the publication of these names. If one wants to include these
“original concepts” and indicate a relationship between Taxon Concepts, the
`intersects` Taxon Concept Relationship can be used instead, optionally in
combination with the `traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType` property. The
`synonym` property can be used for both homotypic and heterotypic synonyms,
although for homotypic synonyms it is preferable to use the `basionym` or
`replacementNameFor` properties on the Taxon Name object.
relationship to Taxon Concept as `taxonName` (the accepted name). This
allows one to dispose of names without having to deal with the Taxon
Concepts that were realised along with the publication of these names. If
one wants to include these “original concepts” and indicate a relationship
between Taxon Concepts, the `intersects` Taxon Concept Relationship can be
used instead.
examples: null
type: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
organizedInClass: http://rs.tdwg.org/tcs/terms/TaxonConcept
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -214,11 +211,7 @@
Relationship Type Vocabulary to accommodate Taxon Concept Relationship
statements between Taxon Concepts of which we know that they have at least
one member in common, but where the more specific topological relationship
is not easily inferred. Also, a property
`traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType` has been added to refine the
`intersects` relationship type for terms that are in use in traditional
synonymy and are better dealt with as Taxon Concept Relationships than
nomenclatural relationships.
is not easily inferred.


Taxon Concept Relationship statements can be made in the treatment of the
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -291,24 +284,6 @@
required: Yes
github: 47

# property: traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType
- localName: traditionalSynonymyRelationshipType
label: Traditional Synonymy Relationship Type
definition: Type of relationship that is used in traditional synonymy, e.g.
'pro parte synonym' or 'misapplication'.
usage: null
notes: >-
This is an IRI term. One should use a value from the TDWG Taxon Concept
Relationship Type Vocabulary. In the case of Taxon Concept Relationships
from traditional synonymy, the `relationshipAccordingTo` is the same as the
`accordingTo` of the Taxon Concept that is the `subjectTaxonConcept`.
examples: null
type: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property
organizedInClass: http://rs.tdwg.org/tcs/terms/TaxonConceptRelationship
repeatable: No
required: Yes
github: 200


# class: TaxonName
- localName: TaxonName
Expand Down