I think that makes *two* people who don't understand sarcasm. Or is it
just me that doesn't know how to do sarcasm?
My point was that a search for "Mona Lisa" *should* return things that
aren't necessarily the Mona Lisa. How many people do *you* know that can
afford an overseas trip just to see one painting? As much as I'd *like*
to travel overseas, I can't even afford to leave my city.
I'm all for 1:1, especially in its most atomic form. I'm not for all
these embellishments like DC.Creator.Email. DC metadata, from my
perspective, is all about resource discovery. Dublin Core is, IMHO,
supposed to be the core (minimum) data we can use to represent a
resource, in order to allow people to discover it. IMHO, we should be
approaching DC from the POV of the researcher, not the cataloguer.
Asking a question like "Who was John Smith working for when he wrote the
article Brown's Cows Eat Meat?" ... leads to a series of discoveries.
The metadata for the article will tell us who the creator was (that's
how we found the article, along with its title), who the contributor
was, and when it was published. From there, we check John Smith's
employment history - not the document's metadata.
Regards
Alex
David Bearman wrote:
> Why do people insist on talking past each other in this discussion? Jim's
> example of all the different Mona Lisa entries is fine. ...
>
> At 09:20 AM 4/16/99 -0400, James Weinheimer wrote:
> >Alex Satrapa wrote:
> >> It's obvious to me that if someone's looking for "the mona lisa", then
> >> they only want to find the original painting, and if they actually want
> >> to see it with their own two eyes, then they can afford the $2000 round
> >> trip to Europe to see it. ...
> >
> >When someone searches "mona lisa" you may be looking for books and
> >articles about the Mona Lisa, or maybe for someone who is named Mona
> >Lisa. There are lots of [things] entitled Mona Lisa. ...
--
Alex Satrapa
tSA Consulting Group Pty Ltd.
Canberra, Australia
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|