Re: [tm-pubsubj] Deliverables: Conversation starter

[Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>]

* Patrick Durusau
|
| Sorry if my writing has been less than clear. Still fighting off a
| cold/cough and what I think is clear is not. Please excuse the fog
| and I will try again.

No problem. Communication is always hard. :)
 
* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| I'm not sure what you mean here. I was just trying to say that I
| think the ISO 639 codes work as an example of published subjects.
| Do you mean to say that you disagree and that we should use
| something else as a demonstrator example showing people how to use
| published subjects, or what?

* Patrick Durusau
|
| Not at all. Perfect example if one wants to make the machine
| readable metadata available using XTM syntax.
| 
| But, would you agree that is only one way of making machine readable
| metadata available?

Of course. Are you trying to say that you want an example of doing it
some other way? Why don't we start out by trying to figure out *why*
we want an example, and how we want to publish it? That is, do we want
PubSubj to publish it? Do we want it to be a kind of canonical example
that people should try to emulate? Or what?
 
| You asked for requirements. 

I see. No, I really asked for a requirements gathering process more
than requirements. :-)

If we all agree that we're on requirements hunt for deliverable #2,
then I for one would be happy to head off into the woods, but only if
we agree that this is what we are going to do. Otherwise I fear we'll
only generate lots of email that will never be used for anything.

So it was a process request more than a straightforward request.

| I took that to mean what are the requirements that would cause
| someone to need something different from the single webpage approach
| used for ISO 639 codes for the human readable metadata and reference
| to XTM files for the machine readable metadata.

Ah. No, I was already aware of that, so I didn't need any examples.

| Not to mention that I may have a vendor who does not know how to
| author the machine readable metadata in XTM syntax. Does that mean
| that they cannot create PSIs?

Absolutely not! The only thing that has been published on this is
deliverable #1 which goes no further than to say that "A PSI may
provide machine-processable metadata about itself." Clearly that does
not restrict you to XTM.

As for what deliverable #2 should say, well, we haven't decided that
yet. I think we should decide on the process before we dive into the
contents, though.
 
| Is that any better?

Yes, very much. Thanks!

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >