LtC Term Issue: GeographicContext

[wouteraddink]

Submitter

Wouter Addink @wouteraddink

Type of Issue

Improvement

Suggested Action

None

Justification

there are some cases for which you have to use ltc:region while it may be beneficial to add a few more terms in the GeographicalContext class, namely World, Ocean, Extraterrestrial.

Term Type

Class

Term

GeographicalContext

Term Identifier

No response

Description

There is currently no possibility to add a geographical context "World" other than using ltc:region. I think several collections will have world as geographical scope. Would it be an idea to add it? Same for waterbodies at ocean level (waterbody is intended only for bodies below ocean level according to the description). And what to do geographical context "Extraterrestrial" for objects that were collected in space, for example on the moon (although there are few), should ltc:region be used for that or do we need an additional term in this class? If ltc:region is intended for this, it may be good to clarify that in the description.

Additional Comments

No response

[ben-norton]

Global, Moon, and Space are valid values for regions. Its a relative term.

[mswoodburn]

@wouteraddink - it should be ok to use waterBody to reflect ocean, I think that part of the term note harks back to a draft stage of the class when there may have been a separate 'ocean' term. Also, the companion waterBodyType term has 'ocean' as one of the examples. So we'll tweak the notes on this term to remove that confusion.

[fmjjones]

Either Region or waterBody can be used for Oceans. If the context is more loosely marine, Ecological Context class would be the place to record the information.

[wouteraddink]

ok thanks for the clarification, I may have looked at an old version of the documentation.