> Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 17:22:29 +0100
> From: Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
> > I think Theo's point is that we're talking about access points
> > that don't belong to any community -- or, if you prefer, the "no
> > community" community. I agree with him that we should provide a
> > lax way for talking about things things (and add that there can be
> > no strict way, for fundamental reasons.)
> Then why expand it to Qualified Dublin Core which self evidently
> does have a community?
> I'd be okay with the base /15/ elements, but as soon as you
> introduce more than that you're moving away out of no community into
> someone's opinion about a community. (See also DC-LIB vs BIB2)
Who said owt about _qualified_ DC? Not I, anyway.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]> www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ Orthogonality uber alles!