tdwg / annotations Goto Github PK

Consensus exists in the interest group that there is a need for an applicability statement on the W3C annotation activities, in particular the Web Annotation Data Model.

Compile information on Feedback Mechanisms related to data quality for the Data Quality Interest Group.

• List of feedback mechanisms
  -- Format
  -- Tools
  -- Annotations, etc
  -- Scope of what information is fed back?

The README currently has the "Motivation" from the charter, which I named "Rationale" as in the IG READMEs.

The charter does also have a "Summary". I think it might be a bit dense for this repository, but I leave it up to you if you want to add it:

Summary

Biodiversity informatics datasets are seldom, if ever, finished. New assertions are continually being made about biodiversity data, which may change their interpretation or require update of resources based on them. With subsequent study, researchers may apply new determinations to specimens. The scope of taxonomic concepts and taxon names change over time, as do geopolitical boundaries and names. Biodiversity data are continually enriched, for example, by extractions to add molecular profiles or dissections to improve morphological knowledge. Each piece of data may be distributed and linked in ways in which an assertion concerning a part of one data set is highly relevant to data being used elsewhere. Images of a specimen may be held in one or more repositories that are different from where its physical specimen is housed and any of these repositories may be the sites for new assertions about the data that are relevant to records in more places than the sites where the assertions are collected. Assertions about scientific data can be viewed as annotations of those data, with associated motivations, actions, and decisions that document the history of proposed, accepted, and rejected changes to those data. The domain content of an annotation is likely to be well described by existing, proposed, or future standards in the domain (e.g. Darwin Core, SDD, TCS, MRTG), but the concern of the annotation is at a different level. For example, an annotation might carry a Darwin Core assertion about a new determination of a specimen, but also assert that the determination is based upon a set of characters observed in particular regions of interest in a set of images of that specimen as seen by the annotator in an image repository. These linkages amongst the who, where, why, what, and when of assertions about data are the particular concerns of annotations. Annotations span many scales from change tracking within an individual data set to transport and linking of assertions across heterogeneous distributed data.

The Annotations Interest Group will provide a forum for discussion about all aspects of annotations in biodiversity informatics, develop cross-linkages with other interest groups and standards, and generate Task Groups to develop specific standards and best practices related to the annotation of biodiversity data.

The "how you can contribute" section of the README currently only has boilerplate text:

Depending on where group interaction takes place (GitHub, mailing list), provide some guidance on how interested parties can follow group activities (e.g. watch this repository, join mailing list) and how they can contribute.

Please update this to how people can actually contribute. There is actually a "becoming involved" section in the charter that might serve as inspiration:

Becoming involved

The Annotations Group is open to all interested parties. You can add yourself to the mailing list. Full membership is available to individuals who intend to be materially active in the group by request to the Convener. We are currently seeking reference implementations of annotation mechanisms and case studies for the annotation of data in general.