[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [humanmarkup-comment] Base Schema-culture
Have given the ISO/CD 21127 documentation a once-over review, and will scrutinize it further. I have been following the CIMI and related SPECTRUM activities for several years now, and have a number of reservations about those activities. I provide some comments below, and please respond on these points. Be aware that the ISO/CD 21127 is a Conceptual Reference Model (CRM), in draft or proposed form only at this time- it is not adopted as an International Standard yet. Also be ware this has origins within CIMI, and CIMI is a proprietary shop, requiring expensive "Member" status to acquire or comment on documents, or to participate, for example, in the CIMI XML Schema for the Description of Museum Objects initiative, and other CIMI activities, etc. and note the "member only" access to documents on the CIMI link pages, e.g., http://www.cimi.org/wg/xml_spectrum/index.html Note also that the CIMI activity is borne of or extended from previous mda and SPECTRUM (The United Kingdom (UK) Museum Documentation Standard) activities (see http://www.mda.org.uk/spectrum.htm), with SPECTRUM currently experiencing revisions, evolving into a second edition. See Spectrum Interactive: http://www.mda.org.uk/specint.htm Note also the fee for membership and access to the documentation. Note also that the parlance is heavily European, and there are some important semantic as well as practical considerations with regard for UK (and commonwealth nations) ENglish versus US English, etc. despite mention of the multilingual and international language codes aspects. Regardless of the above comments, I am tracking down an implementation of this ISO/CD 21127 item. I believe it will be useful to compare an actual implementation of this proposed "standard" for further feasibility study. It is one of many items that is under consideration by the NSDL, and there are related activities regarding Dublin Core and other cultural heritage initiatives, that I am addressing within the context of the ATL's DANA project. At the outset, I sense that the terminology as well as structure of the CRM needs refinement, as noted in the documentation and with the understanding that this is conceptual reference model, which by definition is more abstract, or general in scope and content than a more specific schema such as HUML or AnthML are intended to be, and that it is meant to be extensible, with options for crosswalks and linkages, etc. Issue at forefront is where within this CRM would HUML fit with regard to specific entities, and is this a feasible fit? View of this from our ATL projects position within the broader framework, it is relevant to our DANA project, and ultimately to the AnthML initiative, and therefore also to HUML, however, there appear to be numerous points of consideration regarding structure of the CRM with regard for things anthropological (e.g., human undertakings- both past and present contexts). The scope of the CRM is pointedly targeting museums, libraries, etc., and does address relevant activities that occur within those arenas, and does address objects and documents, as well as events, but this appears to be (more of) a form of information management as well as content management for institutions that emphasize the necessity of tracking of objects and documents within institutions and with weight placed upon description of activities that occur within museum contexts, e.g., the [practical as well as scholarly record of an object (or documents) genesis from initial find, through study (identification and analysis), to curation, loan, transfer, deaccession, etc. Importantly, it attempts to synthesize both collection level description and item level description under a single umbrella. Among other thing, I am somewhat leery of usage of entity labels such as "Physical Man-Made Stuff" . Surely there are appropriate alternatives to "Stuff" ? It also appears on the surface to be cumbersome to implement, and will require substantial effort to establish and maintain. Rex Brooks wrote: > This is an important item. It is an ISO standard under developmet for > a ontology of Human Cultures. It also leads, if you care to search to > some very interesting resources. > > Ciao, > Rex > > At 12:16 AM -0400 8/25/02, Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga wrote: > >ISO's Cultural Heritage Initiative may be something to keep in mind as > >well. > >http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2002-08-20-c.html > > > >Ranjeeth Kumar Thunga > > > >--- > >Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > >Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > >Version: 6.0.381 / Virus Database: 214 - Release Date: 8/2/2002 > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- > >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > > -- > Rex Brooks > Starbourne Communications Design > 1361-A Addison, Berkeley, CA 94702 *510-849-2309 > http://www.starbourne.com * rexb@starbourne.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription > manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> -- >From the desk of James [Jim] E. Landrum III NDSU Archaeology Materials and Technologies Laboratories URL = http://atl.ndsu.edu Digital Archive Network for Anthropology (DANA). DANA URL = http://atl.ndsu.edu/archive Email: <James.Landrum@ndsu.nodak.edu> Phone: 701-231-8059 FAX: 701-231-1047 Voice Mail: 701-231-4228
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC