Hi there,
CEN/ISSS WSLT did fund the development of Vocabulary Registry for just
this purpose but I don't think it's ever been widely used and the URL
now seems to be dead. Perhaps we need to persuade JISC to investigate
the possibility of funding the development of a vocabulary registry as
an IE service.
The point Pete raises regarding the fact that LOM recommends the use of
LangString as the datatype for 9.2.1 is (in my humble opinion)
indicative of the standards poor handling of vocabularies.
Bye
Lorna
On 9 Mar 2005, at 16:24, Charles Duncan wrote:
> This is a good point because it may be important in future. Within the
> intraLibrary repository, administrators are able to use any string for
> the source of a taxonomy. However, when an object is exported from one
> repository and imported into another, the Source is used to try to
> identify if the same classification scheme is in use in the new
> repository.
>
> We really need a taxonomy registry in which recognised source codes can
> be registered and variants of standard taxonomies can be identified.
>
> Charles
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Intrallect Ltd [log in to unmask]
> Braehead Business Park Tel: +44 (0)870 234 3933
> Braehead Road Fax: +44 (0)1506 50 5117
> Linlithgow, EH49 6EP, Scotland http://www.intrallect.com/
>
> Sarah Currier wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Yes, it's me again... more LOM related questions. I have two, which I
>> will do in separate emails.
>>
>> Firstly, in the LOM element 9.2.1 TaxonPath:Source we are supposed to
>> say what classification scheme, taxonomy, etc. is being used in that
>> instance. As we will have in our repository two or three taxonomies
>> which have not been previously used, I wondered if there is a common
>> or
>> standard way of creating the code entered here (I know MARC has a list
>> of such codes maintained by the Library of Congress). The taxonomies
>> we
>> will be using are not so much local, as ones which haven't been used
>> in
>> LOM metadata yet, but may be in future.
>>
>> What have other folk done and how important is this anyway?
>>
>> I note that in the CanCore guidelines they give an example where they
>> declare the National Library of Canada's version of Dewey as: "DDC
>> NLC-BNC http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/caninfo/" ... so they don't use the
>> MARC
>> practice of small letters rather than capitals, and they include a URL
>> (which incidentally doesn't lead straight to the taxonomy, it leads
>> you
>> to your first step (of several) in finding their subject browse page
>> where the taxonomy is used). I do think that including a URL to the
>> source of the taxonomy is a good idea though- I'm not sure where else
>> that information would go.
>>
>> Feedback, discussion, etc. welcome.
>>
>> Second question coming shortly..
>> Thanks
>> Sarah
>>
>
>
> --
>
>
--
Lorna M. Campbell
Assistant Director, CETIS
University of Strathclyde
+44 (0)141 548 3072
http://www.cetis.ac.uk/
|