Looks like an unintentional omission, but let me do some
checking first before I say more - and I welcome comments
from other members of DC-Coverage TF. I am plowing through
all of the dc-coverage group's requests for change today
and tomorrow and shall have a revised Coverage Element
document (including this point) be Wednesday morning about
9am PST.
Mary Larsgaard
------- Forwarded Message
Return-Path: [log in to unmask]
Received: from majordom by gizmo.lut.ac.uk with local (Exim 1.61 #1)
id 0xFjx6-0004U3-00; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:49:48 +0100
Received: from ritig1.rit.reuters.com [199.171.195.11]
by gizmo.lut.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 1.61 #1)
id 0xFjx2-0004Tx-00; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:49:44 +0100
Received: from ritig6.rit.reuters.com by ritig1.rit.reuters.com;
(5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/14Sep94-0947PM)
id AA07570; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 13:48:34 -0400
Received: from ritg4b.rit.reuters.com (132.10.2.72) by ritig6.rit.reuters.com
(Integralis SMTPRS 1.51) with ESMTP id <[log in to unmask]>;
Mon, 29 Sep 1997 13:48:28 -0400
Message-Id: <[log in to unmask]>
Received: from mr.rit.reuters.com by RITIG4.RIT.REUTERS.COM
(PMDF V5.1-10 #23786) id <[log in to unmask]> for
[log in to unmask]; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 13:48:24 EDT
Received: with PMDF-MR; Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:50:10 +0000 (GMT)
Disclose-Recipients: prohibited
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 1997 18:50:10 +0000 (GMT)
From: Misha Wolf <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: DATE and PUBLISHER element definition change proposal
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
To: meta2 <[log in to unmask]>
Autoforwarded: false
Mime-Version: 1.0
Importance: normal
Ua-Content-Id: 11B9ECB20900
X400-Mts-Identifier: [;0110501829091997/A53600/REDMS1]
Hop-Count: 2
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Sender: [log in to unmask]
Precedence: bulk
Ray Denenberg wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> Actually, I suggest that coverage be changed to "geographic coverage" and
> that temporal coverage be covered by date. I have not seen any suggestions
> for coverage qualifiers besides temporal and geographic. If I'm mistaken
> on this point then I withdraw this suggestion.
>
> So my suggestion is:
> - change coverage to "geographic coverage". So this element would no
> longer need to be qualified.
> - put "temporal coverage" in the "date" bucket.
[snip]
>
The current version of Mary's Coverage paper (linked from the DC Web site)
contains all of the following. So I'm puzzled about the suggestion for an
unqualified DC.coverage element. What would it mean?
coverage.periodName
coverage.placeName
coverage.x.min
coverage.x.max
coverage.y.min
coverage.y.max
coverage.z
coverage.t.min
coverage.t.max
coverage.polygon.include
coverage.polygon.exclude
coverage.line
Mary - Is the absence of coverage.z.min and coverage.z.max intentional?
Misha
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
Reuters Ltd.
------- End of Forwarded Message
