[CHECK] Use separate area vocabulary for common names
Currently we try to map common name areas to tdwg and country vocabularies.
Experience has shown that it is better to have an own vocabulary.
It future it is also planned that a mapping between (area) terms is possible via concept relationships so queries on areas of different vocabularies should still be possible.
We can use the emArea vocabulary which is mostly for occurrences but includes all areas required for common names, too.
Currently 147 of 149 areas are imported. The 2 not imported are the additional area 211 and 213 of Azores and Canary Is. They are not needed for common names.
The mapping emCommonNameRegionFk -> emArea can be handled via table emLanguageRegion. But
- emCommonNameRegionFKs is a comma separated list, so it needs to be split first
- emLanguageRegion.Region include region name and emCode, the mapping is to be done via the emCode part (for very few areas such a code does not exist, e.g. Wales which has 147 common names and Catalan which has no common names)
The includedIn mapping can be done via emRelArea, but still needs to be checked for completeness. Also there is one area that is included in 2 areas (666- North Caucasus, part of Russion Federation and Caucasia (Ab+Ar+Gg+Rf(CS))
#16 Updated by Andreas Müller 14 days ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
- % Done changed from 70 to 90
This is generally solved. We only need to discuss how "Wales" should be handled as it is the only area which does not exist in E+M area vocabulary.
A follow up ticket exists for creation of includedIn relationships