Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Baltimore minutes

[Mary Nishikawa <nisikawa@fuchinobe.oilfield.slb.com>]

Bernard and Patrick,

Thanks for these prompt minutes.

I would like to get some input in before the IRC meeting and I need more 
clarification since I was not in Baltimore. Looks like we need to have the 
IRC meeting for a joint meeting between Geolang and Published Subjects.

At 20:24 02/12/20 +0100, Steve Pepper wrote:

>(1) Section 5, third list item:
>
>Instead of "http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso639/#NOR"; we proposed
>going with "http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/639/#NOR";. Note the extra
>slash between "iso" and "639", which means that the publisher on
>whose behalf we are publishing this and other PSI sets - in this
>case ISO - is represented by a directory.
>
>Did we change "#NOR" back to "#nor"? I can't remember. Lars Marius
>was going to double check the text of the standard.

If you take a look at the Geolang minutes from Montreal it was decided to 
use the the numeric codes of the ISO standards.   These minutes need to be 
voted on. What is proposed here seems to contradict that decision. It would 
be good if we did agree and go forward, but I do not know if this is for 
the Published Subjects Committee discussion.

Following what Lars Marius already proposed, the human readable file was 
the index file in directory iso639 and it will be changed to  639?
Going with the numeric codes,  the psi for Norway would be this:
http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/639/#578

I think that it would be a good idea to register
http://purl.org/oasis   Do we need to get some approval from OASIS to do this?

>(2) Rest of section 5:
>
>We considered using "http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/"; and
>"http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/639/"; as PSIs for ISO and the ISO 639
>standard respectively, but didn't reach any conclusion.

This looks good to me.

>Note that we
>do actually need PSIs for these subjects in order to express formal
>metadata such as "published-by" and "based-on" - so we can't duck the
>issue by saying it's not our job.

  We can use the new dublin core medata registry for the controlled 
vocabulary for terms such as publisher, source, etc.   For example, they 
have already placed "PSIs" in their  Metadata registry
http://dublincore.org/dcregistry/index.html

Search for "publisher" display  "controlled vocabulary terms" in their 
metadata registry and you will get
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/publisher

with its description.


>  believe we also considered using "http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/639/";
>as the PSI for the PSI set itself (as per ex2).

I am not so sure why we would need a psi for the psi set itself.

>That would of course
>conflict with its possible use for ISO 639 (the standard, as opposed
>to the PSI set). Perhaps the standard should have the PSI
>"http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/#639/";? That way all PSIs for ISO
>standards that we translate will be in the same resource. Nice and
>tidy.

I would rather the standard use http://psi.oasis-open.org/iso/639/


>I do not recall discussing the PSI "http://psi.oasis-open.org/"; and
>see no need for it myself, at least not yet, so ex1 should go away.

Question: Do we need a psi for oasis, or is the domain enough?
We could register this, as I mentioned above.
http://purl.org/oasis


I think that If we discuss this at the Published Subjects TC meeting we 
should have a joint meeting then with the Geolang members and announce this 
to them too.

The Geoloang members who are not in the Published subjects TC  are John 
Cowan and Peter Pappamikail, perhaps?

Cheers,
Mary