In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Shorthouse, David"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>The advantage of the LSIDs is that they may act as a mapping catalog
>that is capable of drawing the lines from old names (or even current
>names that have not been fully accepted) to current nomenclature.
>Merely using "Theridion agrifoliae" I would argue is not even enough
>for humans.
What proportion of species references *currently on the web* [1] use an
LSID, and what proportion use a binominal or suchlike?
Hint:
Google finds 105 for "Theridion agrifoliae"; and *zero* for
"3561403" + "Theridion agrifoliae"
Google finds about 504,000 for "parus major"; and *zero" for
"384 8440" + "parus major"
Note also that a search for the above boinominals on the uBio website:
<http://names.ubio.org/browser/search.php>
returns the relevant LSIDs' one use-case for the microformat would be to
find the binominal on a web page, and pass it to uBio, in order to
return the LSID.
[1] e.g. those at <http://microformats.org/wiki/species-examples>
--
Andy Mabbett
Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
Free Our Data: <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
