On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Andy Powell wrote:
> > C) Agent-Properties (Ex: Address, Name)
...
> FWIW, my personal view is that any agent working group should be given a
> strong steer in the direction of making recommendations for the use/re-use
> of existing work outside of DCMI (e.g. vCard, MARC relators, etc.) rather
> than inventing new stuff for this.
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?
> Certainly if C) involves inventing a new element set it should be
> ruled out of scope of DCMI.
Out of scope for The Dublin Core, yes. But inventing a new element set
is not out of scope of the DCMI mission defined in Ottawa. Whether it
is a good idea to do this (as opposed to pointing to existing work
elsewhere) is a different question.
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
|