OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

regrep message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Subject: Literary Work, Classification Scheme, and D.E. Dictionary

Literary Work, Classification Scheme, and D.E. Dictionary

Here, schematically, is a setup for the issue I described back on March 11
and we discussed on the phone.  As the user browses a registry and drills
down he might encounter this schema:

	List of Subject Areas
		Computer Documentation
				IBMIDDOC 1.0 and related data
				IBMIDDOC 1.1 and related data
				Docbook 3.1 and related data
				Docbook 4.0 and related data

The List of Subject Areas is clearly a classification scheme, it clearly
isn't owned by the SO for Docbook, and it may or may not be owned by
the RA.  I'd call it a taxonomy.  Computer Documentation is a node in that 
taxonomy.  IBMIDDOC 1.0 (for those who've never heard of it, it's a 
documentation DTD from IBM) is a d.e. dictionary, as is Docbook 3.1.  
(In both cases, the related data isn't part of the dictionary.)

What are "IBMIDDOC" and "Docbook"?  This is the level of sorting that I said
was like a literary work (the Bible).  It seems pretty clear that we need this
level.  But are these nodes in a taxonomy?  

It seems to me the answer is no; they're convenience labels for the collection
of IBMIDDOC DTDs and the collection of Docbook DTDs, both of which are
classified under Computer Documentation.   The labels aren't owned by the
RA (at least in these cases) but rather by the SO (at least in these cases).

I believe IBMIDDOC and Docbook are two items in a enumeration of labels
for collections of DTDs.  Who maintains the enumeration?  not the individual
SOs; they own only their own labels; so it must be the RA who maintains
the enumeration.  Do these labels require registration, or indeed any
act of volition on the part of the SOs?  That would seem silly; they're
needed in the context of the particular registry that presents this kind of
view of its contents, but the SO shouldn't have to create them.  Would
a label be needed if there were only one version of a DTD?  maybe not
(it's probably a matter of taste), but as soon as there is a second, it
would be.

So what feels most comfortable to me is to say that displaying these labels
is part of the interface to the registry, which is something the Regrep TC 
isn't trying to specify.  

In that case, how does the registry keep track of what label a given DTD 
should be sorted under?  If it's not going to be done by hand, the 
reliable way is to have a field for it in the metadata.

Do we want to specify such a field or leave it to RAs to extend our spec 
if they want such a field?

Do we want to specify such field as optional so that it's available 
interoperably for those RAs that choose to use it?

regards, Terry

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC