Markus Klink writes:
I do not like the words "the same architecture" however.It implies that a
DC-quick-and-dirty lies within the same architecture as one that uses
controlled vocabulary and in general describes resources in a way that
makes
sense. I do not see how one could merge these two datasets without
impairing
the value of the information contained within the datasets.
By making an effort to come up with a suitable standard for the
description of
Internet resources, I think that someone will have to tell the truth as
well,
that "quick and dirty" simply does not work.
The solution should be matched with the task. A rich and elegant (read
'costly') is exactly the right thing to do when the requirements of the
application demand it, and in such a case, I would agree with the point that
Markus makes.
There are other, simpler but very reasonable modes in which DC can be
implemented for which anything like a full blown authority control system
would be overkill.
Could these two applications be integrated? Probably not. Could their
corresponding datasets be merged? Probably not. Could each be searched by
an application that is looking for a title, or a name, or a subject...? I
believe so. In this sense they *do* participate in the same architecture,
and the commonality they share is useful.
stu
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|