Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Deliverables: Conversation starter
Lars, 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. Lars Marius Garshol wrote: > * Patrick Durusau > | > | Note that the charter of GeoLang says: > | > | **** > | This Technical Committee will define sets of published subjects for > | language, country, and region subjects, in accordance with the > | guidelines for published subjects to be laid down by the Published > | Subjects TC. > | **** > | > | I have not seen any guidelines for published subjects, much less that > | they should be expressed in XTM syntax. > > 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? > 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? > | Seems odd to me that requirements become an issue after GeoLang has > | already run off in one direction but I can live with that. > > Well, GeoLang is still waiting for PubSubj. That is, we pretty much > consider ourselves done with the ISO 639 codes, but we haven't > finalized yet, since we are waiting for PubSubj to publish its > guidelines so we can follow them... > Agree. > | [long use case sketch snipped] > | > | Does that help? > > Not at all. Everything you write is clear, but I am completely at a > loss as to how it pertains to what we are discussing. I need some > context to understand what it is you meant to tell me with this > example. (The example itself was clear.) > You asked for requirements. 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. What I was formulating was a case where the strategy used by with ISO 639 could be argued would not work well outside of high speed data access. 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? Is that any better? (If not, I will wait until tomorrow, when hopefully feeling better to try again.) Hope you are having a great day! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau Director of Research and Development Society of Biblical Literature Patrick.Durusau@sbl-site.org Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!