-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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.
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
source for vernacularname, distribution and description #4
Comments
Note: on GBIF, a species page will show aggregated information from different sources and will indicate the title of the published checklist as the source. See e.g. description info at: https://www.gbif.org/species/5682465 So, if our source is the fishes checklist itself (rather than aggregated from elsewhere), than it is maybe not that relevant to indicate that. |
imo, I would provide the sources for these data in the metadata (which can be found in the description) |
Question 1: does Hugo have the sources on which the info in the checklist is build? Question 2: do we know which source was used for what information? |
Should we add a
source
to vernacularname, distribution and description? It is probably all the checklist itself, so not really relevant?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: