Hi Mary,
Thanks for you feedback - we will take it into account.
> For herbaria, it would be really great if we could send information
> either to Index herbariorum or to BCI and know that it will be
> shared.
Reduction in duplication and further integration is top of the list.
> I would like to know that this and the GBIF effort to store metadata
> about collections that I hear about are going to be one and the same
> thing. We need to minimize the number of projects doing pretty well
> the same thing (from the perspective of a collection person).
BCI is part of the GBIF effort and will become more integrated as time
goes by.,
> I like BCI because it has lat/lon data, and stores number of specimens
> as a number besides having some other fields, and allows me to enter
> information. .
Good.
> I think it really bad that I was able to change entries for multiple
> herbaria without telling them (I was adding lat lon data). This may
> have changed - I have not looked for two years.
At the outset we (well me mainly) believed there was a requirement for
a wiki-like place to edit information along side the authoritative
sources like IH. This needs to be reviewed from the feedback we have
received.
> I would like to be able to search more easily - and download records
> selected by my criteria to a csv or tab-delimited file.
You can download the whole thing as a CSV and filter the rows you
like.
http://www.biodiversitycollectionsindex.org/static/webserves.html
Continued access as much of the data as possible in CSV dumps will be
continued.
> I would like to be able to store information on number of specimens
> imaged, databased, and georeferenced. This is in connection with the
> project to digitize all US herbaria.
Yes this would be good and will be the driver for what we do next I
think - it is certainly what interests me.
All the best,
Roger
