Re: Comment on Action vocabulary

Michael,

I like having both writeTo and appendTo.
I understand the common vocabulary has a generalization spirit, and 
adding new information is conceptually different from modifying it.
For example, if the asset is a SQL database, specialized actions like 
INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE are neatly different.

Víctor

El 22/10/2014 12:47, Michael Steidl (IPTC) escribió:
>
> Group:
>
> We've been pointed at an inconsistency of the Actions 
> read/writeTo/appendTo
>
> -read is about reading any data from an asset
>
> -writeTo is about adding data to an asset
>
> -appendTo is about appending data to an asset -- and is a narrower 
> term of writeTo
>
> But: there is no Action to cover editing/changing existing data.
>
> Solution 1:
>
> -add an Action "edit" for editing/changing existing data
>
> -make writeTo a narrower term of it
>
> Solution 2:
>
> -redefine writeTo to cover editing/changing existing data
>
> -drop appendTo ...
>
> -... and add this Action:
> name: addTo
> definition: adding data to an asset at any location
>
> Please comment:
>
> -should we stick to the current definitions
>
> -if not: should we adopt either solution 1 or solution 2
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
> *Michael Steidl*
>
> Managing Director of the IPTC [mdirector@iptc.org]
>
> International Press Telecommunications Council
> Web: www.iptc.org <http://www.iptc.org/>- on Twitter @IPTC 
> <http://www.twitter.com/IPTC>
>
> Business office address:
>
> 25 Southampton Buildings, London WC2A 1AL, United Kingdom
>
> Registered in England, company no 101096
>