Marc Salomon wrote:
> Don't look to a non-technical dictionary (esp. an en-gb one :) for
> definitions of jargon.
>> The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
Er... surely this would be en-us?
> Schema: representation of a data model [etc..]
Thanks, much clearer now. Not.
This is my point, that some of the language on the list is getting very
geek-centric and esoteric, which means there's a lot more scope for
misunderstandings, misconceptions (and therefore even MORE e-mail) etc.
I strongly believe that the primary deliverable of the whole Dublin Core
effort is the consensus that has been created across a whole range of
different disciplines, including <gasp!> non-technical folk. Obviously
things need to get dirty and technical eventually, but if the
non-technical participants get disenfranchised, it will destroy most of
the good work that has been done to date and we'll have just another
technical feature to confuse users with. Just a note of caution really.
OK that's my friday afternoon rant over with, I'm out of here...
T.
-- Tony Gill ---------------------- Programme Leader: ADAM & VADS --
Surrey Institute of Art & Design * Farnham * Surrey * GU9 7DS * UK
Tel: +44 (0)1252 722441 x2427 * Fax: +44 (0)1252 712925
-- [log in to unmask] -- http://adam.ac.uk -- http://vads.ahds.ac.uk/ --
