Thanks for your comments Neil,
You make vaild points here, but I believe your characterisation of what is
going on here is a bit unfair.
The very existence of this discussion list, publicly available and
subscribed to by 300 plus members from around the globe should I think give
you some reassurance that FISH is not intending to work in the way you
suggest.
Yes - we are under-resourced, and that limits the time and attention to
formal procedures that processing of candidate terms may receive. Bear in
mind that no-one, (not even me!) is employed full-time to work on this. But
we do what we can to move things forward. Talking ourselves down will only
take us of in the wrong direction.
As Yoda puts it:
"Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hatred, and hatred leads to
suffering... " :-)
Edmund Lee
Forum Co-ordinator
Forum on Information Standards in Heritage
--------------------------------------------
Find out more about FISH at the revised website
www.fish-forum.info
--------------------------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Campling [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:03 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [FISH] Updating Word Lists: The Phantom Menace
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> David Thomas says "its [DCAP] role is merely as an Advisory
> Panel", and Jason says it can be "used as a sounding board
> and focus group for list owners on candidate terms for lists
> that have no existing mechanisms".
>
> Hah! I get the message:
>
|