Andy Powell wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2005, Mikael Nilsson wrote:
>
>> "Machine-processable information about resources"
>
>
> Yes, I was going to make a similar suggestion
>
> "Structured information about resources"
>
> though actually, I wonder if strictly it should be
>
> "Structured data about resources"
>
> on the basis that data only becomes information when you understand the
> model that was used to structure it?
... which is of course precisely what we need. Just "structured data" is
not enough - we need to also understand the model. Thus I think
"Structured information" is ok.
(That's implicit in my "machine-processable", so "machine-processable
information" is somewhat redundant, actually)
Your definition re-enables the tin can, by the way, for good or bad. The
nutrition information is very much "structured information", though not
machine-processable.
What I think is important is that the "about" part of the definition is
also "structured" or "machine-processable". Thus explicitly
"Machine-processable information about a resource, with a
machine-processable reference to the resource."
... :-D
/Mikael
--
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
|