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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

tm-pubsubj-comment message

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


Subject: RE: Kal is subscribed! (was RE: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Good PSIs neverdie)


Kal:

Ideally that would be the case. But requiring subcriptions seems to keep
most of the spam out.

</karl>
=================================================================
Karl F. Best
OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
+1 978.667.5115 x206
karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kal Ahmed [mailto:kal@techquila.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 9:39 AM
> To: tm-pubsubj-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Kal is subscribed! (was RE: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Good PSIs
> never die)
>
>
> My mistake, I had thought that because this was a public list
> I didn't need
> to subscribe but could just post. My apologies to those who
> had to read (or
> delete) this diversion from the thread.
>
> Kal
>
> At 08:53 25/03/2002 -0500, Karl F. Best wrote:
> > > Kal cannot post to this list. He has interesting contributions.
> > > Isn't tm-pubsubj-comment public?
> >
> >He should subscribe first. Then he can post.
> >
> ></karl>
> >=================================================================
> >Karl F. Best
> >OASIS - Director, Technical Operations
> >+1 978.667.5115 x206
> >karl.best@oasis-open.org  http://www.oasis-open.org
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Bandholtz, Thomas [mailto:thomas.bandholtz@koeln.sema.slb.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:35 AM
> >To: 'tm-pubsubj-comment@lists.oasis-open.org'
> >Cc: 'bernard.vatant@mondeca.com'
> >Subject: FW: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Good PSIs never die
> >
> >
> >Kal cannot post to this list. He has interesting contributions. Isn't
> >tm-pubsubj-comment public?
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Kal Ahmed [mailto:kal@techquila.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 3:10 PM
> >To: Bandholtz, Thomas
> >Subject: RE: [tm-pubsubj-comment] Good PSIs never die
> >
> >
> >Thomas,
> >
> >My last email was bounced by the list as well... :-(
> >
> >At 13:54 21/03/2002 +0100, you wrote:
> >
> >[Kal:]
> >No one has yet said that the documentation would be XML ! But even so
> >which is more human readable:
> >
> ><record>
> ><isbn>123456-09-23</isbn>
> ><auth-code>AHM1298</auth-code>
> ><pubdate>20011110</pubdate>
> ><stock-code>98993939385402</stock-code>
> ></record>
> >
> ><book>
> ><book-title>XML Meta Data</book-title>
> ><authors>
> >   <author>Kal Ahmed</author>
> >   <author>Danny Ayers</author>
> >    ...
> ></authors>
> ><published>2001-11-10</published>
> ><description> -- blurb about the book goes here </description>
> ></book>
> >
> >I would suggest that XML of the first form is
> "machine-readable" and XML
> >of the second form is "human-readable". But depending upon
> the system(s)
> >involved, the first form might be the only form that can be
> >automatically generated for the subject indicator.
> >[Thomas:]
> >We have been talking about XTM, RDF, XHTML, customized XML
> so far - all
> >this is XML. But you may be right - needs not to be XML. But
> I think it
> >should not be binary encoded.
> >
> >
> >If this became a limitation for a PSI, it would restrict
> PSIs to being a
> >much smaller subset of all subject indicators. The ISO and XTM
> >specifications do not specify a format for a subject
> indicator. I guess
> >it would be a shame if that flexibility had to be sacrificed
> for PSIs.
> >
> >
> >
> >Readability only depends on the specific intelligence
> implemented in the
> >machine/human.
> >If I (human, hopefully) understand the encoding of
> <auth-code> etc., I
> >can read it.
> >If a machine doesn't, it cannot read it neither.
> >
> >
> >This is true within the definition of "readable". But should a PSI
> >resource be "readable" or "understandable". If it is the
> latter, should
> >that "understandability" be dependent on other knowledge
> external to the
> >resource itself ? In limited circumstances (e.g. intranet or extranet
> >environments) it could be argued that all users of the PSI would know
> >what auth-code indictaed (esp. if using a documented schema). But in
> >generalised internet solutions, surely a subject indicator
> that relies
> >on knowledge of yet another schema would be flawed ?
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Kal
> >
> >
> >----------------------------------------------------------------
> >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>



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


Powered by eList eXpress LLC