I appreciate Stu's statement, but
>At the same time, the group must be willing to examine carefully and debate
the merits of the User Guide objections.
there are three types of objections here:
1. to the semantics (where did they come from? am I wrong in thinking
that they are presented here for the first time?)
2. to conflating them with HTML instead of keeping them separate for
a particular syntax
3. to the particular HTML and para-HTML syntaxes proposed.
In sort, it is out of order to be writing a User's Guide instead of
proposals for new/altered semantics, and proposals for specific syntactic
representations of them. Stu's message frames the issue as examining
objections to the User's Guide; I object to the User's Guide being
the basis of discussion in the first place.
Could we have a statement of the rationale for the new/altered
semantics, and get back to an orderly discussion?
Regards,
--- Forwarded mail from [log in to unmask] (Weibel,Stu)
>From [log in to unmask] Thu Sep 26 11:49:54 1996
Received: from ruby.ora.com (ruby.ora.com [198.112.208.25]) by rock.west.ora.com (8.6.13/8.6.11) with ESMTP id LAA22019 for <[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 11:49:43 -0700
Received: from gizmo.lut.ac.uk ([log in to unmask] [158.125.96.46]) by ruby.ora.com (8.6.13/8.6.11) with ESMTP id OAA05335 for <[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 14:52:46 -0400
Received: (majordom@localhost) by gizmo.lut.ac.uk (8.8.Beta.6/8.6.9) id TAA20599 for meta2-outgoing; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 19:44:04 (BST)
Received: from oclc.org (fssun10.dev.oclc.org [132.174.19.11]) by gizmo.lut.ac.uk (8.8.Beta.6/8.6.9) with SMTP id TAA20594 for <[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 19:43:53 (BST)
Received: from msunion.dev.oclc.org (oamailhost.dev.oclc.org) by oclc.org (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA05816; Thu, 26 Sep 96 14:43:18 EDT
Received: from Microsoft Mail (PU Serial #1083)
by msunion.dev.oclc.org (PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9a for Windows NT(tm))
id AA-1996Sep26.144000.1083.127205; Thu, 26 Sep 1996 14:42:59 -0400
From: [log in to unmask] (Weibel,Stu)
To: [log in to unmask] (meta2)
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail via PostalUnion/SMTP for Windows NT
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Organization: OCLC Inc, Dublin, Ohio USA (614)764-6000
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 1996 14:42:59 -0400
Subject: consensus and the dublin core
Sender: [log in to unmask]
Precedence: bulk
The single most important asset of the Dublin Core is the consensus
that has been developed around it. No one should imagine that that
consensus will be discarded easily or lightly.
The User Guide group has taken on the very difficult task of actually trying
to instruct the uninitiated in how to apply these mythical elements we have
elaborated in our cider-soaked, late night epiphanies. They are to be
forgiven
the notion that a bit of reality would so easily sway us from our vision.
At the same time, the group must be willing to examine carefully and debate
the merits of the User Guide objections. And just to muddy the waters, we
have
just concluded a day and a half workshop here in Dublin on Metadata for
images.
It will surprise no one on this list that the Dublin Core figured
prominently in
the deliberations (and conclusions). Stay tuned for further developments.
I am off next week to the Bonn metadata meeting, and thence to the NordInfo
meeting in Lund, at both of which meetings I expect further churning of our
collective agenda. Expect another meeting in the Spring, and give some
thought to the agenda we should develop for that meeting.
stu
--- End of forwarded message from [log in to unmask] (Weibel,Stu)
--
Terry Allen O'Reilly & Associates, Inc. [log in to unmask]
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
which we soon find ourselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
A Davenport Group sponsor http://www.ora.com/davenport/
|