Thanks Andy.
And here's where I fail to see how we are to actually put New Zealand
in a Controlled Vocabulary without it being a description of New
Zealand. We aren't actually putting the place in the CV. That is
impossible to do. Rather we are putting a description of the place in
our dc:subject. In fact, we're using Getty's description of the
place, aren't we?
so:
dc:subject is Getty's description of New Zealand
and
dc: subject is ISO3166's description of New Zealand
vs.
dc: subject is not the described resource or the description, but the
actual socio-political, economic, territorial, geographic, sovereign
New Zealand?
Somehow we have to be explicit about the textuality and hence
contextuality of metadata, especially vocabularies. I think Douglas
was on to something when he was talking about 'source' in his Feb.
11, 2007 post to DC-ARCHITECTURE.
joe
On 22-Feb-07, at 8:40 AM, Andy Powell wrote:
>> On a related note, I have a question. Why is a VES a set of
>> resources? Why is it not a set of descriptions, as defined
>> by the DCAM?
>
> A VES is a set of resources because it is the resources (rather
> than the
> descriptions of those resources) that we are interested in using as
> values in DC statements.
>
> If I write a book about New Zealand, then the dc:subject of my book is
> 'New Zealand' (the place) - the dc:subject is not 'a description of
> New
> Zealand'.
>
> Andy
> --
> Head of Development, Eduserv Foundation
> http://www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation/
> http://efoundations.typepad.com/
> [log in to unmask]
> +44 (0)1225 474319
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joseph T. Tennis
The University of British Columbia
jtennis | at | interchange | ubc | ca
|