Eric Miller said:
>> As such, the refinements identified by the LOC group for the CCP elements
>> are listed in the ballot and all have the value of an 'DCMI Agent'. The
>> vocabularies for defining tha describing DCMI Agent is in a separate set.
Renato said:
>Sorry Eric, but the Agent WG _did not_ recommend these qualifiers.
>
>There was no clear way on how to agree on which roles would be
>recommended. So, the WG decided that that best way would be to
>support a Role qualifier and recommend a number of vocabulaires
>to choose from.
Again, I agree with Renato.
Eric has made the argument that whether there is a Role qualifier with
recommended vocabularies or whether there is a list of role-type
subelements such as "illustrator" and "editor" is entirely a matter of
syntax, not semantics.
If that is the case, then there is no reason not to present the
recommendation as issued by the agent WG, as the ballot attempts to be
syntax-neutral. If as I suspect that is NOT the case, and there is some
semantic difference, then the ballot should reflect what the agent WG
recommended. That is, either way, it should be on the ballot as a Role
qualifier with recommended vocabularies.
p
--------------------------------------------------------------
Priscilla Caplan
Assistant Director for Digital Library Services
Florida Center for Library Automation
2002 NW 13th Street, Suite 320, Gainesville FL 32609
[log in to unmask]
352-392-9020 x324 (phone)
352-392-9185 (fax)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|