- From: Johan Zeeman <joe.zeeman@tlcdelivers.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 17:11:56 -0500
- To: <www-zig@w3.org>
I think Liv and I have a different understanding of what a "format" is. I've been using the word format to mean the encoded record as represented by bits on the wire. In this sense, DC is not a format (but DC in XML is) and in this sense it is both good and necessary for the format to explicitly state the character set being used. j. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Liv Aasa Holm" <Liv.A.Holm@jbi.hio.no> Sent: Friday, March 01, 2002 2:12 AM > You are right in one thing: we have agreed upon character sets OUTSIDE the > MARC formats. So when we convert between the different MARC formats we > usually know which characterset is used. But I think is is a major drawback > of formats like MARC21 (or the former USMARC) that it specifies a character > set AND that it is not really a valid MARC21 record unless it is in this > specific character set. The format, i.e. fields and subfields, should not > be tied to a character set. > > DC is not only used with XML. And, yes, it is a format. > > Liv
Received on Friday, 1 March 2002 17:13:51 UTC