Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closePrevious work
Posted by leonardocandela on 03 Jun 2015 at 07:57 GMT
I'm wondering whether the authors are familiar with our previous work http://dx.doi.org/10.1016...
Although GBIF is a very large DB, it might be useful to interface with other DBs.
A similar comment applies to the "processing" part, scientists are willing to be provided with a flexible environment enabling them to easily inject their own quality check conditions.
RE: Previous work
renyan replied to leonardocandela on 04 Jun 2015 at 03:17 GMT
Dear Leonardo Candela:
I have already read your comment on our paper "SDMdata: A Web-Based Software Tool for Collecting Species Occurrence Records". Well, when I prepare this paper, I do a lot of search on published paper which relative to GBIF. Unfortunately, I don't find your paper published on March, 2015. Your previous work is respectful and it seems very powerful. As you said already, our paper has some commonalities in collecting species occurrence records with your paper. Maybe the most different between our papers includes: 1) our paper focus on GBIF and provide cross check function (e.g. checking the species name with GBIF and cross-checking occurrence data); 2) we use Python to develop a web-based software tool (but I donot find your source code, even I do not know your development language, yet); and 3) our code is an open source software (GNU AGPL licensed) allowing anyone to access and manipulate the source code. While, your paper provides more generate function and more flexible. I think our software can provide the users another choice to collect species occurrence or provide some important open source code for other software developers to develop new software.
Sincerely yours,
Renyan Duan
RE: RE: Previous work
leonardocandela replied to renyan on 04 Jun 2015 at 17:11 GMT
Dear Renyan Duan,
thanks for your reply that allows me to better explain my previous message.
The approach we discussed in our paper advocates the need to have a flexible and open infrastructure for actually dealing with species data management, including species occurrence records. We have conceived and developed two major services: one dedicated to data collection and one dedicated to data analytics. Their distinguishing features are described by http://dx.doi.org/10.1016...
These services are part of a large software system (www.gcube-system.org/) that is open source.
Regards,
Leo