Bill Olivier wrote:
> Hi Sarah
>
> I wonder if the questions you ask arise from MD serving two different
> but related roles/purposes:
> 1. The Publisher's description of their LO (e.g. the publisher's front
> page of a book (is there a name for this?))
> 2. Independent Librarians/Catalogers' classification of a LO (e.g. a
> catalogue card)
>
> Not surprisingly, I think you are wearing the second hat.
>
> I would think that LO publishers should use General 1.5:Keyword when
> they want to add whatever terms they think relevant, especially if they
> are not familiar with available taxonomies.
>
> My understanding (but its a long time since I looked at it!) is that the
> classification section's 9.4:Keywords should only contain the relevant
> terms from the vocabulary/taxonomy specified in the 9.2:Taxonpath.
>
Hello Bill,
I don't think that there is anything in the published standard to support
this, and it certainly doesn't reflect current practice.
Phil.
--
Phil Barker Learning Technology Adviser
ICBL, School of Mathematics and Computer Science
Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
Tel: work - 0131 451 3278 home - 0131 221 1352
Web: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/
|