----- Message from [log in to unmask] on Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:04:38 -
0500 -----

To: Sandra F Hostetter <[log in to unmask]>
cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Dublin Core and Corporate Master Data

Hi Sandy...

I have some comments in your email below.  I have started each one with >>.

-Paula Markes
Eli Lilly and Company
email: [log in to unmask]




Sandra F Hostetter <[log in to unmask]>
Sent by: DCMI Corporate Implementation Interest Group <DC-
[log in to unmask]>

02/13/2003 03:19 PM
Please respond to Sandra F Hostetter

To:        [log in to unmask]
cc:
Subject:   Dublin Core and Corporate Master Data

Hello everyone,

I am Sandy Hostetter from the Rohm and Haas Company, a manufacturer of
specialty chemicals headquartered in Phila, PA, USA.  Various elements in
the Dublin Core set suggest the use of controlled vocabularies.  As a card
carrying librarian I am of course an enthusiatic supporter of such a
practice, but in the corporate setting the controlled vocabularies that
would be the most beneficial to our purposes are our own vocabularies -
some of which need to be captured and created and others f corporate master
data.  For example, at Rohm and Haas Company we have business units, but no
official business unit naming practice or single source for those names and
their variations, abbreviations, etc.  Being able to slice and dice
information enterprise-wide across our intranet, document management
system, and other repositories by business unit would be very beneficial.
Are any of you doing this?

>>This is indeed a problem.  We are working at tackling that, but as you
might imagine, the problem is huge.

!;Do any of you have an official naming organization that takes care of
this kind of corporate master data?

>>There is a central data organization that provides "code lists" for
applications.  These are essentially what we, in the library field, could
call "controlled vocabulary" or "authority files", as, for example, they
have lists such as ISO Country Codes.   However, there are customized
controlled vocabulary lists that we need for ourselves, and we develop and
maintain those.   It is also imperative that communication between the
users of the "code lists" in the "applications world" and the users of the
controlled vocabulary lists be kept open, so that there is consistency in
data retrieval across all types of information.

We are currently implementing SAP as our ERP and while in theory an ERP can
unify this kind of data, I don't believe the folks who administer the
system know anything about the care and feeding of a controlled
vocabulary.  I see this stuff as the equivalent of authority files in the
traditional library sense.  Any suggestions on how to approach these folks
when I R>

>> Sandy, unfortunately, I am missing the tail end of your message.   I
would agree that these are really authority files.  And, I do think you
have a step ahead of you to help educate the areas that have this
information as to it's possible uses and how you can help in the
maintenance of those authority files.   I too have a background in
librarianship.  But, I also spent around 12 years working as an systems
analyst.  So, I have found that helpful, as I think I bring an
understanding to what is going on "on the other side of the fence"
whichever "side of the fence" I am on.  So, I would suggest, it might be
useful to find someone, in the area that currently owns the list, who might
have an interest in looking at the information from a different standpoint,
and work with them to spread the understanding of authority files across a
wider scope of people.  You might also want to find some context in which
you both c! an


Sandy Hostetter
Rohm and Haas Company
1-215-61-5492
[log in to unmask]

the opinions expressed are my own and do not represent those of the Rohm
and Haas Company