At 04:04 PM 12/11/2001 -0500, Carl wrote:
>CARL: could make that argument. But NISO has already pushed us toward
>techMD for targets. Dave Ackerman, if you are lurking, will AES put
>calibration in the adminstrative block or the processing block.
>
>Jerry, our view of digiprov (stolen idea from Dave Ackerman) is to make it
>event-oriented, i.e., events are the first-order objects. It is about
>process: PLAY the 78, EQUALIZE the sound, DIGITIZE in an a-to-d device,
>RECORD on a workstation. Each event in the chain has an associated device
>and person (and organization, etc etc). There is a sense in which MAKING
>a calibration-tone set or SCANNING a target are related events, although
>they are "about" the performance of the setup and operator more than
>"about" the file. (THey can be "in" the file, to be sure.) So I am
>comfortable either way (techMD or digiprovMD). But at the moment leaning
>slightly in the opposite direction from you. We'll have plenty in
>digiprov without the targets, I think.
I don't think we're actually that far apart; it's the level of detail
you're capturing
about the 'event.' For me, the information regarding a scanning target is
a means of technically characterizing the event of scanning the image. So,
putting target information in digiprov is consistent with an event-oriented
view of the world, I think.
Jerome McDonough
[log in to unmask]
Digital Library Development Team Leader
Elmer Holmes Bobst Library, New York University
70 Washington Square South
New York, NY 10012
(212) 998-2425
|