On Tue, 18 Jan 2000, Weibel,Stu wrote:
> Perhaps I read more into Identifier than is warranted. I interpreted this
> as a Link identifier (A URI in our current dominant idiom).
>
> Does this distinction make it clearer?
You mean a link in the sense of a URL for an agent's home page for
example? No, that doesn't help.
The agent and the agent's home page are two separate things that should be
identified separately. The home page URL is a property of the agent (i.e.
it is part of the 'description' of the agent) but it has no place in the
description of a resource with which that agent is associated. It
doesn't serve to 'identify' the agent, which, as the Agent proposal
states, is the function of the Creator, Contributor and Publisher
elements.
Andy.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Cox [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000 10:52 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: "name" is not an element refinement, its an encoding scheme
>
>
> Amongst the proposed "Semantic Refinements" for (Agents) are
> * name
> * identifier
> IMO these do not make sense, in this position, so I voted to reject.
> But (again!) I seem to be the only one with this position, so I'd like
> to understand if I'm missing something.
>
> I think we all understand that the "value" of the agent elements is a
> party (person or organisation) or process (instrument, software, event,
> etc).
> More specifically, the value *identifies* the party or process which has
> a connection with the resource.
>
> Following this logic, "identifier" is completely redundant as a qualifier
> (the value of (Agent) is *always* an identifier ...),
> while "name" is one *encoding scheme* for identifiers.
>
> Where have I gone astray?
> --
> Best Simon
>
Andy
--
UK Office for Library and Information Networking
University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK Voice: +44 1225 323933
www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell Fax: +44 1225 826838
Resource Discovery Network - www.rdn.ac.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|