W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-zig@w3.org > March 2003

Re: NORZIG proposed new bib-1 Use attributes

From: Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 15:58:58 GMT
Message-Id: <200303191558.h2JFwwR09086@badger.miketaylor.org.uk>
To: rden@loc.gov
CC: www-zig@w3.org

> Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:13:47 -0500
> From: Ray Denenberg <rden@loc.gov>
> NORZIG has proposed several new bib-1 Use
> attributes.  See
> http://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/proposals/norzig-bib1-proposal.html
> Please comment by April 18.

I have reservations about plenty of these -- quite apart from sharing
Barbara's distaste for _any_ new BIB-1 attributes -- but I wonder
whether it's even worth discussing.  We all know BIB-1 is a garbage
can, and it's hard to see that it makes much difference exactly how
much garbage is contains.  So my first instinct was just to shug and
say, what the hey, if NORZIG wants 'em, let it have 'em.

That said, several of these seem clearly not to belong to a
bibliographic attribute set: Composition (in the musical sense),
Compression and Format catch the eye.  Also, possibly Equinox -- in so
far as I understand what it is, which isn't very far.

The others -- Intellectual level, EAN, NLC, CRCS, Nationality Of
Author, Subject Genre, Subject Occupation, Subject Function and
Edition -- seem reasonable enough bibliographic access points, but I
agree with Ralph that the proposed search-vocabularies are pretty
horrible, especially for the first two.

 _/|_	 _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <mike@miketaylor.org.uk>   www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "Further up and further in!" -- C. S. Lewis, "The Last Battle"

Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
Received on Wednesday, 19 March 2003 10:59:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:05 UTC