 |
 |
Done. See: http://128.253.121.110/DC-UB/DC-UBprocess3.html Diane [a.k.a., "Her Crankiness"] At 12:25 PM 6/12/2001 -0700, you wrote: >Sorry, Diane ... don't mean to make you cranky :-(. I would suggest that >we take section 4.7.2 and make it 4.6.3 under categories of recommendation >and eliminate all of the remainder of 4.7. > >4.6. Categories of recommendation > 4.6.1. CROSS-DOMAIN. Terms of general use and broad interest > across domains. > 4.6.2. DOMAIN-SPECIFIC. Terms of interest to a limited domain or > set of domains. > 4.6.3. OBSOLETE. For terms that have been superseded, > deprecated, or rendered obsolete. Such terms will remain in > the registry for use in interpreting legacy metadata. > >I am assuming that things that are rendered obsolete were once >DCMI Recommendations. Therefore a DCMI Recommendation that >a term be made Obsolete is OK--it is nevertheless a recommendation. >The elimination of a category of non-conforming does not preclude >the inclusion of such terms in the registry if we think that is appropriate. >They would just be there without a DCMI Recommended status. > >Stuart > >-----Original Message----- >From: Diane I. Hillmann [mailto:[log in to unmask]] >Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 11:06 AM >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: Mission and Principles, revised draftx > > >Well, hey, if someone would just suggest something else, I'd be happy to >fix it. I didn't have any alternative language in my notes ... :-( > >Crankily, >Diane > >At 10:16 AM 6/12/2001 -0700, you wrote: > >Tom, the "non-conforming" language is in Diane's revised draft at > >4.7.1: > > > >http://128.253.121.110/DC-UB/DC-UBprocess3.html > > > >Stuart > > > > > I know that the process document still has this notion of > > > "non-acceptance" or "non-recommendation" which means nothing > > > more than that a proposal isn't going to become a DCMI Recommendation. > > > I'd really like to have us consider dropping this notion as a specific > > > status > > > --drop it both literally and from the UB process document leaving us > > > with a process in which the UB either brings a proposal forward as a > > > Recommendation (X-Domain, Domain-Specific, Obsolete) or it does > > > not (with explanation of why not). > > > >I agree. Are you referring to the notion of "non-conforming"? I thought > >we had dropped that already. What part of the Process document are you > >referring to? > > > >Tom > > > >___________________________________________________________________________ >_ > >___ > >Dr. Thomas Baker > >[log in to unmask] > >GMD Library > >Schloss Birlinghoven > >+49-2241-14-2352 > >53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax > >+49-2241-14-2619