On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Andy Powell wrote:
> > In what form would such recommendations come before the Usage Board, if
> > at all? Because of our grammar, we cannot simply create a qualifier
> > pointing to MARC relators the way we point to LC Subject Headings. And
> > if the Agent WG recommended, say, vCard, should the Usage Board have
> > any role in ratifying that recommendation?
>
> They wouldn't come to the usage board at all. vCard elements are similar
> to the IEEE elements used in the DC-Education recommendation. They would
> not need ratifying by us - it would be inappropriate.
I agree with this. But what if they were to recommend vCard plus two new
elements? Would those two new elements come before the Usage Board? What if
those two elements seemed to be outside the scope of the Dublin Core?
> The MARC relator codes are, in effect, element qualifiers taken from a
> non-DC namespace - as with any element qualifier they are simply new
> elements that happen to be refinements of one or more DCMES elements.
> Again, we shouldn't be in the business of ratifying these things - though
> we could make statements of the form "MARC relator X refines DCMES element
> Y" ?
I should think that those statements would most properly be made in the
namespace of the MARC relator terms (Library of Congress). But the
possibility you raise is also interesting: should we be in the business
of ratifying statements about the relationship of terms in other
namespaces to terms in our own?
> OK, I stand corrected (though I don't say I'm overly in favour of such a
> wide mission). What I should have said was, it seems inappropriate, to
> me, for DCMI to expend effort developing a core standard for describing
> people.
>
> In any case, it is probably inappropriate for me to make such statements
> here... the usage board is not the place to discuss what it is sensible or
> not for working groups to consider. Apologies.
I think we can clarify our own scope and role as a group without
constraining what working groups decide is important to do.
We still need to decide, as a group, whether elements (and related
qualifiers or controlled vocabularies) descriptive of agents fall into
the scope of Usage Board -- irrespective of whether those elements form
a complete "core element set" for agents.
Then we need to decide whether the UB would review or ratify
statements, for example, to the effect that MARC relator terms are
sub-properties of CCP elements.
Tom
_______________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask]
GMD Library
Schloss Birlinghoven +49-2241-14-2352
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-14-2619
|