Bill,
I belive as I stated earlier that there is a need for an optionl
form of authority that could be referenced from the keyword element.
Further, it would be useful for some definitive guidance on the
difference between a textual description and a keyword description if
there is no form of authority referenced. My gut feeling would be that
the content of the keyword element would just be the "key words" from
the description if there is no form of authority involved.
Regards,
Ben
---------------------------------
Dr Ben Ryan
HLSI Software Development Manager
University of Huddersfield
Tel: 01484 473587
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
---------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Olivier [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 16 March 2005 16:23
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Question re Keywords in the LOM: what are folk doing?
Thanks folks, I stand corrected (must find time to brush up on my LOM!)
- certainly on the use of Taxon for the taxonomy terms.
But, back to Sarah's point, is there then still a need to clarify the
purpose and/or use of 9.4 Keywords, coming as it does in the
Classification section?
Bill
Andy Powell wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Mar 2005, Phil Barker wrote:
>
>> Please correct me if I you think I'm wrong, but to me it seems quite
>> clear that both the text and the hierarchy (the Source element is
>> nested in the Taxon Path element, and so relates to the other
>> elements nested in the Taxon Path element, cf. the Purpose element
>> which is at the Classification level and so relates to all elements
>> in that category) in the standard lead me to the conclusion that the
>> 9.2.1 Source element applies only to the element 9.2.2 Taxon, not to
>> 9.4 Keywords (in other words, 9.2.2 Taxon is where you put the terms
>> selected from the taxonomy specified in the TaxonPath).
>
>
> I agree.
>
>>> If it's not clear in the LOM/UK LOM Core documentation how
>>> keywording and classification are supported, then I think you have
>>> highlighted a point of ambiguity, and hence of potential
>>> interoperability breakdown, which should be clarified in a future
release of LOM/UK LOM Core.
>>
>>
>> Is there any demand for more authoritative clarification of this?
>> Or for local practice (ie UK LOM Core) to be that you can use element
>> 9.2.1 to specify the source of keywords used in 9.4? --would doing
>> this break anyone's instances?
>
>
> I haven't been following the previous discussion but why would you
> want to do this? That would completely ignore the hierarchy in LOM
> and would be bad move IMHO.
>
> Andy
> --
> Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
> http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell
> tel: +44 1225 383933 msn: [log in to unmask] Resource Discovery
> Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
>
> .
>
|