I'm with Simon Pockley on this one. DC is about broad categories for
resource discovery for the wider public. I think that most people would see
a distinction between still and moving images as a useful first order
distinction - animated GIFs and time lapse films not withstanding. The two
are quite different in terms of the users experience of them, the sorts of
uses they might be put to and the hardware and software required to access
them in this in the current era of limited bandwidth (yes I know this is
really a DC.Format issue).
I think the presence or absence of a sound track could be left to subtypes
(but doesnt make a moving image multimedia / compound type per se) as can
some of the other finer distinctions but I personally would argue for still
versus moving as a major distinction.
Jack Gilding
============
At 01:34 PM 23/7/98 +0800, Simon Cox wrote:
>Simon Pockley wrote:
>>
>> Simon Cox (Thu Jul 23) wrote:
>>
>> >The parsimony principle argues against adding types willy-nilly.
>>
>> Conceded, but the cultural and symbolic importance of the moving image
in the
>> 20th century leads me to argue for a distiction to be made between
moving (time
>> based) images and still (timeless) graphics.
>
>
>Simon - I think we should examine this more fully.
>
>A concern of mine is that the boundary between
>moving and still images is not a very firm or
>necessarily useful one. Certainly not as distinctive
>as the boundary between image and text, for example.
>
>Most moving images are realised as sequences (collections?)
>of stills, for example, a mechanism which is even more
>clear in the digital realm (mpeg == concatenation of jpegs, etc).
>
>The movement+sound aspect gives me more pause,
>but I think the multi-media case here is supported
>by noting that in all the formats I know about (not many!)
>the sound-track and visuals are separable, and are often
>merely synchronised rather than fully entangled.
>
>Perhaps "moving vs. still" is more about *sub*-Types than Types -
>to be dealt with better in "structured" DC?
>
>(PS - re-reading my "willy-nilly" statement above
>it comes across more flippant than was intended.)
>--
>__________________________________________________
>Dr Simon Cox - Australian Geodynamics Cooperative Research Centre
>CSIRO Exploration & Mining, PO Box 437, Nedlands, WA 6009 Australia
>T: +61 8 9389 8421 F: +61 8 9389 1906 [log in to unmask]
>http://www.ned.dem.csiro.au/SimonCox/
>
>
>
end =============================================================
Jack Gilding [log in to unmask]
Project Manager, EdNA VET Project http://www.edna.edu.au/vetwp/
Communications & Multimedia Unit phone: 03 9412 4427
OTFE, PO Box 266D Melbourne VIC 3001 fax: 03 9412 4452
(level 3, 232 Victoria Parade, East Melbourne)
NET*Working 97 reports and papers: http://www.nw97.edu.au/
|