Sampling process is implied - i.e. not modelled

[F3RR3T]

The phs: ontology makes no mention of samples or sampling.
This is because we are interested in the outcomes of the Surveillance Event, not the operational processes that occur between conducting a Surveillance Event and its outcomes..

The outcomes are:

1. Determination of Pest Occurrence Status (defined by http://linked.data.gov.au/def/phs/voc/occstatuses)
2. Identifications of taxa, resulting from direct observation or through some diagnostic procedure on sample/s taken during the Surveillance Event.

We leave these as distinct features of a record of a Surveillance Event. i.e. it is up to the data recorder to correctly assign the pest status in relation to taxon occurrence/s.

• If no Taxon Occurrences are recorded, the pest status will be 'Absent'.
• If only non-target occurrences are recorded, the pest status will be 'Absent'
• If a target pest occurrence is recorded, the pest status is 'Present'.

There is no direct linkage within the ontology or the vocabs between 'Target Pest' and taxa are members of that 'Target Pest'. External polices control this 'pest membership' determination.

Previous iterations of the ontology modelled sampling but these classes were removed to simplify the model and focus it on the business requirements / outcomes.

[dr-shorthair]

There is no direct linkage within the ontology or the vocabs between 'Target Pest' and taxa are members of that 'Target Pest'.

Not quite following this.
Where is the ontology documented?

[dr-shorthair]

Found it https://linked.data.gov.au/def/phs