JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for HERFORUM Archives


HERFORUM Archives

HERFORUM Archives


HERFORUM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

HERFORUM Home

HERFORUM Home

HERFORUM  February 2002

HERFORUM February 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: ALGAO Terminology Lists -reaction wanted! -Reply to Nick andJason -Reply

From:

Jason Siddall <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

SMRforum is for the circulation of information and general discussion of is <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 4 Feb 2002 17:32:51 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (135 lines)

hmm

I think your suggestion for a application is great

Paul Gilman wrote
"As to costs being shunted onto users, well my own feeling is that this
should be shared amongst all concerned, so it need not be great. In any
case, if users are implementing standards, especially new ones, there is
of course a cost in any case in terms of staff time,"

I am worried about that

the development of standards and their implimentation is a key area ... i
am worried that the less well funded SMR's will not be able to fund this
thus will not impliment the new standard ... i am not sure anything is just
a "one of development or cost" standards develop and thus the
application would have to develop as it gets more complicated the cost
could grow for the application ... i think we need to see the scope and
content of any such application ... will be be designed just for updating
the events fields?

Putting on FISH hat shouldn't we be advocating development of an
application or term mapping for other platforms?

also the question has to be asked will it be a one off cost for the
application across the profession or a one off cost to each SMR?

Indeed you are right there is staff time to mapping terms and updating the
system and indeed on staff time basis it could be more expensive not to..
however some may just choose not to bother - i am not just saying that
either.

Now i FULLY support the implimentation and development of standards it
is very important and will make all our jobs alot easier in the long run ...
which is why we have found it difficult to exchange data everyone out
there is using lots of different standards.

I agree an automated update would be better however I think we must be
very clear what this will mean as this is not just a 1 off cost other
standards are in development.

The implimention of standards is a core element and users should be
involved with development of new terminologies... but their involvement
should not mean they must pay for their systems to be updated.

Charging at the user end could be counter productive ...

the whole business case of having a national accepted system is that
standards and the developement of standards are apart of the system
not an add cost.

sorry Paul to be a little negative on this, I agree that it would make things
easier .... but the cost of this worries me .. not necessarily for ourselves
we could probably absorb costs .. but i think their is a very dodgy area
here it would be a setting a principle that no one has explored before ...

The whole issue of how we impliment standards and terminology is a
burning issue. I do not think users should have to pay for standards to be
impliented.

Also putting on FISH HAT what about those users that are not using
exergesis ... some use Oracle etc

Are we running the risk that we are placing FISH into a position of
favouring one system or platform.

I am not discounting this development but we must be very clear about
the issues that may arise from this as it may set a precedent in policy. It
is worth airing some of those issues now so we are all clear as to what
this means.

In some ways i would rather see FISH pay for implimentation of
standards ... but as a virtual body i'm not sure that is possible as yet

I think we cannot say yeah until we have fullly seen the scope of what is
being proposed in principle it sounds very sensible. Automation to
standards is probably the only way we can update standards. Cost and
how we do it are perhaps the stops.

I'm not sure we could justify paying anything for a programe as we have
the technology and understanding to do it ourselves if someone provides
the mapping to our terms. How many SMR's can do that? possibly lots
which could mean a small user base for such an application ...

now if the users are willing to pay for such applications thats a different
matter ....

so the question is (probably for exegesis users it seems at present)

what will be the scope of the application... will it just be for events?)
are users willing to pay for development of such applications bearing in
mind other terminologies will develop over time and indeed some
developments may mean changes to the structure of how we record our
systems?

Maybe our EH buddies would like to come in here ...
Noting also that the standards that FISH develops cross country
coundaries and so EH might not be able to fund them ...

grief its 5.30  ....

cheers
jason
>>> Paul Gilman AAG Manager ES <[log in to unmask]>
4/February/2002 03:48pm >>>
Nick, Jason,
If I understood Crispin correctly - the proposed application would flag up
affected records in the validation field to help identify which records
need
revisiting. As to the cost, hopefully English Heritage might be able to
help, and also if an application could be made generic it ought to be a
one-off cost to develop it. As to costs being shunted onto uers, well my
own
feeling is that this should be shared amongst all concerned, so it need
not
be great. In any case, if users are implementing standards, especially
new
ones, there is of course a cost in any case in terms of staff time, if
nothing else, and the proposal I am making ought to enable savings to be
made in this area,

best wishes
Paul


This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended only for the
recipient(s) named above.  It may contain confidential or privileged
information and should not be read, copied or otherwise used by any
other
person unless express permission is given.  If you are not a named
recipient, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your
system.
It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that appropriate measures are
in place to check for software viruses.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager