On Thu, 9 May 2002, LeVan,Ralph wrote:
> > From: Mike Taylor [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > terms that will already be familiar to many people. We should go with
> > vanilla DC, warts and all.
> My problem with calling this DC is that we aren't the DCMI (although I sit
> right next to them) and it isn't our standard to be defining. They have
> avoided the issue of searching and I don't want to be the one to force it on
> them. So, I really think we should call it XD.
I'm sure that there are many other projects that use Dublin Core in the
context of IR. We can say that if you're searching DC using SRW then you
should use 'dc' as the prefix without the DCMI doing anything whatsoever.
We're not claiming to be creating the official way to search DC, just that
if you want to search DC using SRW (which is what we're creating, and can
say whatever we want about it) then you should do it this way.
I don't see the issue?
,'/:. Rob Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. Twin Cathedrals: telnet: liverpool.o-r-g.org 7777
____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://liverpool.o-r-g.org:8000/
I L L U M I N A T I