[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [stdsreg] Metadata Standard v2.0
Thanks, Martin. I am working on v2.5 and these were two points I was already in the process of addressing. Your analysis and input on these points is exactly in line with my own. I should have a v2.5 up for review in the next 2 days that addresses these points and many more. Regards, Bob Hager -----Original Message----- From: Martin Bryan [mailto:mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com] Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 9:57 AM To: Bob Hager; 'Standards Registry Mail List' Subject: Re: [stdsreg] Metadata Standard v2.0 Bob Under the comments section for SDO Acronym you state "To provide for identical Acronyms for different organizations, the full title of the organization should be used with acronym following in parenthesis if available. Note that some organizations use only their acronym, such as ASTM." The requirement that the full name precede the acronym is inconsistent with the use of Acronym in the title. What you are asking for is the SDO Name, which may just be an acronym, as in the case of ASTM. Note also that in the case of shared standards, such as ISO/IEC and ANSI/AIIM ones, the names of more than one organization may need to be entered. Also note that the name and acronym can be dependent on the language being used (see ISO re French and English versions). Should we mandate that the Engilish version of the name be specified (which mitigates against national standards) or allow both national and English variants to be stated? (In other words, allow this field to be repeated.) I would prefer to see the Resource element renamed SDODetails or SDOInfo as this is not a general resource but one specific to the SDO. I wonder if we should not have a specific datatype for URIs, rather than using string. Martin Bryan
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC