From: OXVAXD::LOU "Lou Burnard" 17-OCT-1996 17:36:10.45
To: MX%"[log in to unmask]"
CC: LOU
Subj: RE: COVERAGE
This is a good example (I think) of something that should *not* be in the
core. On the premise that the criteria for inclusion are that the element
is going to be used for essentially the same purpose by all likjely DC users,
I think we have already seen evidence that GIS people and Art Historical
people are proposing to use it in entirely different ways.
Is it metaphorical or physical coverage? Saying "this is a painting of
the madonna" is epistemologically different from "this is a map of the
Netherlands". Or to put it another way, a given resource may be either
"from 17th c france" (in the provenance sense) or "about 17th c france"
(in the topic sense). I understand these to be different, but I dont
understand which coverage is meant to be.
|