These things are never as simple as they look at first. I've been back to the 
original discussion on Trac and the history here is that 
biological_taxon_identifier was the original proposal for the identifier 
Standard Name allowing identifiers for any standard to be used. This was 
criticised because users of the data had no way of knowing how to resolve the 
identifier and so the strategy switched to providing information on how to 
resolve the identifier through the adoption of LSIDs. 

Unfortunately, when I set up the Standard Names I screwed up by setting up the 
request early on in the discussion (circa 2013!)  asking for 
biological_taxon_identifier and then forgetting to update it to reflect the 
subsequent Trac discussion.

So, in a nutshell the Conventions Document is correct but the Standard Name is 
wrong. The fix would be to deprecate biological_taxon_identifer and alias it to 
a new Standard Name biological_taxon_lsid. This would require references to 
'biological_taxon_identifier' in several Standard Name descriptions changing to 
'biological_taxon_lsid'.

Shall I set this in motion? 

@japamment If the answer to the above question is 'yes' can I do it through 
this ticket or do I need to open a new one.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/308#issuecomment-731084888

This list forwards relevant notifications from Github.  It is distinct from 
[email protected], although if you do nothing, a subscription to the 
UCAR list will result in a subscription to this list.
To unsubscribe from this list only, send a message to 
[email protected].

Reply via email to