In our work on reference models for evidence we found that relations data
schemes and values were quite diffferent for Content Relations; Context
Relations, and Structure Relations. I think the CON position would
benefit from starting with this assumption. The Structure Relations are
about the digital data files. The Context Relations are about the object
history. The Content Relations are about the things depicted/discussed in
the content.
On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, Stu Weibel wrote:
> PROPOSITION:
>
> RELATION is an important element, but as yet there is no clear way to
> express it consistently, and hence it should be deprecated.
>
> PRO: Without clear guidelines, use of this element will be haphazard and
> confusing
>
> CON: While it may not be clear how to best express this element, it is
> widely recognized as an essential descriptor for placeing digital
> objects in the context of others. Its use can be discouraged in
> the short term pending the results of a working group to provide
> usage guidance.
>
|