1,554
edits
(Trying to add requirement for eml file with each dataset.) |
|||
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
Note to aggregated data providers (e.g., California Consortium of Herbaria (CCH), Calbug, Tri-Trophic TCN (TTD), Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria (CPNW)): | Note to aggregated data providers (e.g., California Consortium of Herbaria (CCH), Calbug, Tri-Trophic TCN (TTD), Consortium of Pacific Northwest Herbaria (CPNW)): | ||
When providing us access to your data, we highly encourage you to provide your aggregated data one provider at a time, each in their own Darwin Core archive | When providing us access to your data, we highly encourage you to provide your aggregated data one provider at a time, each in their own Darwin Core archive. Each dataset should be paired with a separate EML file that includes the metadata about the dataset (such as a list of contacts). iDigBio is moving towards providing data quality feedback, data correction, annotations, and other value-added information back to the providers and thus we want individual contact information for each source provider where possible. The hope is that the information could be re-integrated at the source so that higher quality data would be in place for the provider as well as be available to downstream data consumers such as iDigBio and GBIF. | ||
However, if that is not possible or desirable, we still welcome your aggregated data as one monolith. | However, if that is not possible or desirable, we still welcome your aggregated data as one monolith. |
edits