Re: [tm-pubsubj] psdoc version 0.3

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

I didn't get a chance to see this draft before the meeting.  Thanks 
Bernard, Steve and Lars Marius. The definitions do seem to fit. I like 
"PSI" mentioned as a note. Maybe we can even label this paragraph as a 
note. I think that the way it is presented is good; so when we say PSI we 
do not mean one or the other but both indicator and identifier as two faces 
(aspects) of really one thing.

When we want to speak about one or the other though, we should not use the 
term PSI. I think that something like this should be added, or maybe it is 
obvious. I still have a little bit of the feeling, about 20% worth, of 
wanting to reserve PSI for Published Subject Indicator.

I have been working on a simple "industry" example for a PSI set in xtm, 
but I haven't figured out what to do with the metadata yet. I can 
put  everything in one xtm file, but it may be better to have all of the 
DCMES elements  in a separate psi set in xtm  and have the specific 
metadata instances in the "industry" xtm file that  refer back to the the 
published subjects of the DCMES elements.  Maybe I haven't thought this 
though enough yet. Any ideas would be appreciate.

Glad to have you back Peter.

-- Mary


At 01:30 PM 1/29/2002 +0100, you wrote:
>psdoc v 0.3 to take into account Steve and Lars Marius last input
>http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tm-pubsubj/docs/recommendations/psdoc.htm
>
>Not complete, but glossary and introduction are updated
>
>To be continued
>
>Bernard
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>