On Wed, 26 Feb 1997 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Btw, how well accepted is the list of
> object types (TYPE) that's been proposed
> by the ROADS group?
> (http://www.roads.lut.ac.uk/Metadata/DC-ObjectTypes.html)
I just thought I'd get in before anyone else and say that that list was a
draft proposal - its not a standard of any sort. We might decide on meta2
as a collective that there's a better, well defined existing standard we
could use or that our list is a bit crappy, etc, etc.
Having said that, it is based on the widely used set of BibTeX citation
types, along with a number of suggestions from meta2er's. So the guts of
it have been used by a large number of people for some time for citations
and it has at least a few additions to bring it up to date for electronic
resources. YMMV.
Tatty bye,
Jim'll
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jon "Jim'll" Knight, Researcher, Sysop and General Dogsbody, Dept. Computer
Studies, Loughborough University of Technology, Leics., ENGLAND. LE11 3TU.
* I've found I now dream in Perl. More worryingly, I enjoy those dreams. *
|