Re: [ubl-lcsc] Code Lists Are Great!

[Tim McGrath <tmcgrath@portcomm.com.au>]

we decided at the face to face that we would need to be more explicit in
our specification of code lists to enable the proposed NDR method to work.
 for example, we need to identify a code list with a name (to be used for
the type definition) and a specific reference (eg URI) to the code list (as
we come to know them).

so what we should be considering is the specific code list we see as being
required for UBL and how we can identify and encourage maintainers of these
code lists.

once more the mechanics of this will be to add the necessary meta data requirements
into our model (e.g. add a few more columns to the spreadsheet)

Lisa Seaburg wrote:

3D062D36.5D0697E1@gmi.net">

Well, actually confusing, but who's keeping track?

Here is the latest version of the Code Lists paper from the NDR group. 
Please take time to read through this, I invite discussion on the
UBL-LCSC discussion list.  Topics to think about:

How does this affect Library Content?
Does this change the way we work?

I am sure you can come up with other ideas of what this means to Library
Content.....


Lisa

draft-maler-codelists-04.doc

Content-Type:	application/msword
Content-Encoding:	BASE64

-- 
regards
tim mcgrath
fremantle  western australia 6160
phone: +618 93352228  fax: +618 93352142