Thus spoke Frank A. Roos (at least at 09:25 AM 12/5/96 +0100)
>Rebecca S. Guenther wrote:
>> Just to summarize (and agree with Rachel), I would like to see what is now
>> "Subject" (scheme=abstract)" become "Description" and
>> "Subject" be used as keyword (as the default) or a term used by a
>> controlled thesaurus (in which case it would have a "scheme=" element.)
>> ("Subject" could also include a classification number, also qualified by
>> scheme=).
>
>I agree.
Me too.
I sympathize with Stu's descent into various circles of hell,
and agree that we need to settle these names. But if I have to spend
all my capital on one change it would be the one above. Let's have
separate description and subject elements. Description is prose,
subject is either uncontrolled keywords or controlled terms with
a scheme qualifier that specifies the controlled vocabulary.
In an earlier message Stu said that if people wanted changes we
needed to organize. It appears that Rachel, Rebecca, Frank, and I
are doing so. Anyone else out there want to join? Anyone out there
want to start a counter-organization to oppose this motion?
Regards,
Ron Daniel Jr. email: [log in to unmask]
Advanced Computing Lab voice: +1 505 665 0597
MS B287 fax: +1 505 665 4939
Los Alamos National Laboratory http://www.acl.lanl.gov/~rdaniel/
Los Alamos, NM, USA 87545 obscure_term: "hyponym"
|