Currently the guide recommends using some (general) DwC occurrence fields for DNA specific things. From several discussions with the user (data publishers) community, it is clear that this may conflict with the wish/need to use those fields for more standard (non-dna) data.
This relates particularly to: materialSampleID, organismQuantity, organismQuantityType, sampleSizeValue, sampleSizeUnit. But likely also to identificationRemarks, identificationReferences, and more.
For dna-derived data the need and usage of such fields will often be very narrow and well-defined. We should explore alternatives to using the more general DwC Occ fields to avoid "competition" and ambiguous use and guidelines.
relates to: #208
Currently the guide recommends using some (general) DwC occurrence fields for DNA specific things. From several discussions with the user (data publishers) community, it is clear that this may conflict with the wish/need to use those fields for more standard (non-dna) data.
This relates particularly to:
materialSampleID, organismQuantity, organismQuantityType, sampleSizeValue, sampleSizeUnit. But likely also toidentificationRemarks, identificationReferences, and more.For dna-derived data the need and usage of such fields will often be very narrow and well-defined. We should explore alternatives to using the more general DwC Occ fields to avoid "competition" and ambiguous use and guidelines.
relates to: #208