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

RE: NORZIG proposed new bib-1 Use attributes

From: Sebastian Hammer <quinn@indexdata.dk>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:43:26 +0100
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20030320114049.01e56f00@bagel.indexdata.dk>
To: Liv Aasa Holm <Liv.A.Holm@jbi.hio.no>
Cc: www-zig <www-zig@w3.org>


Hi Liv,

I apologise if this question has been raised before in this debate.

In DanZIG, we're also not using the attribute set architecture 
specifically. However, we did choose to create a new attribute set (Dan-1) 
for attributes of specific national relevance, rather than moving 
everything into Bib-1. This was based on the observation that pretty much 
all targets on the Danish market were capable of supporting multiple 
attribute sets when pushed.

Can you say something about your thoughts in this regard?

--Sebastian


At 09:55 20-03-2003 +0100, Liv Aasa Holm wrote:

>We (NORZIG) are definitely on the list and we have worked in this area for
>more than 20 years now (network protocol area).  All our systems do have
>z39.50 modules and some have had implementations for 10-15 years.  And, yes,
>we do use bib-1, we have no imediate plans of switching to bib-2, AND we
>need the extra USE values proposed.
>
>Liv A. Holm
>
>===== Original Message from Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com> at 19.03.03
>16:53
> >> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 10:07:59 -0500
> >> From: Shuh Barbara <barbara.shuh@nlc-bnc.ca>
> >>
> >> By proposing such extensions to the bib-1 attribute set, you are
> >> negating all the work that has been done on the development of the
> >> new attribute architecture and the bib-2 attribute set.
> >
> >Hi Barbara.
> >
> >I am very sympathetic to your complaint about the AA and BIB-2 being
> >overlooked, and I very much agree that we should all be doing all we
> >can to ensure that these unarguably superior technologies be used in
> >preference to BIB-1 wherever appropriate.
> >
> >That said, I get the impression that the NORZIG people have a system
> >already established, and that they merely want to extend it (if any
> >NORZIGgers are on this list, maybe they can confirm or deny?)  If
> >that's correct, then it seems a bit harsh to require them to throw out
> >all their existing search-profiling and start from scratch with the
> >Attribute Architecture.
> >
> >So I'm really keen on the AA -- you'll have noticed that I used it and
> >it alone for the search specifications in both the Zthes profile
> >(zthes.z3950.org) and ZeeRex (explain.z3950.org) -- but I don't think
> >we can hope to successfully impose it on communities that are already
> >90% of the way through implementation.
> >
> >> I note that in the recently released specs for an IMS Digital
> >> Repositories Interoperability specification
> >> http://www.imsglobal.org, there are guidelines for the use of Z39.50
> >> and a proposal for an extensive extension of bib-1 for IMS
> >> Meta-Data.  Why not take the opportunity to use the new attribute
> >> architecture there?
> >
> >The only reference I could find to Z39.50 on that site was in the IMS
> >Digital Repositories White Paper at
> >       http://www.imsglobal.org/imsdr_whitepaper_v1p6.html
> >which says:
> >
> >       Searching allows the portal to send the same query to
> >       many content providers, retrieving results from each,
> >       merging them, and then presenting them to the
> >       user.  Searching is facilitated through the use of
> >       Z39.50 and the Bath Profile.  It is not necessary for
> >       portals to talk directly to content providers in all
> >       cases - brokers may take queries from portals and fan
> >       them out to multiple content providers.  A broker uses
> >       Z39.50 to talk to both the portal and the content
> >       provider.
> >
> >It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that this project, in which Z39.50
> >appears to play a very small part, should use the Bath profile, which
> >has a great deal of international recognition.
> >
> >(What I do think is an absolute crying shame is that Bath decided to
> >go with BIB-1 in the first place, when BIB-2 was -- just -- available
> >to be used instead.  That was the moment of opportunity to Save The
> >World.)
> >
> >By the way, none of this should be construed to mean that I am
> >particularly fond of the specific access points that the NORZIG
> >propose.  I'll comment separately on them.
> >
> > _/|_  _______________________________________________________________
> >/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <mike@miketaylor.org.uk>   www.miketaylor.org.uk
> >)_v__/\  "Oh, don't be so sentimental mother, things explode every day"
> >       -- Monty Python.
> >
> >--
> >Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
> >       http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/childsplay/
>
>*******************************************************
>Liv A. Holm
>associate professor
>Oslo University college
>faculty of journalism, library and information science
>tel. +47-22-45-27-77
>fax.:+47-22-45-26-05
>*******************************************************

--
Sebastian Hammer, Index Data <http://www.indexdata.dk/>
Ph: +45 3341 0100, Fax: +45 3341 0101
Received on Thursday, 20 March 2003 05:40:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 29 October 2009 06:12:23 GMT