At 04:21 PM 8/30/2004, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
>I believe SRW needs a utility index set.
>
> If we have an index, say, 'identifier', in a utility set, we can
>qualify/scope it (see note below) however we want.
I agree strongly with Ray's idea. It seems to me this would position
SRW to support a variety of contexts that are already out there but
would be difficult to incorporate otherwise, e.g., the Microsoft
Office properties, the UDDI business and service elements...
A while ago, I drafted at http://wwww.gils.net/base.html a context
called "base" (but could be part of "utility" or the "cql" context).
It would have the following eight indexes:
category - a collection of things sharing a common attribute
date - a day within a particular calendar year
identifier - a character string that distinguishes a person, place,
thing, concept or grouping
location - an identifier of a particular place or position in which a
person or something is
name - a word or phrase that constitutes the distinctive designation of a
person, place, thing or concept
organization - a name of a body composed of individual people and/or
legal entities, having an orderly structure to fulfill a purpose
person - a name of an individual human being
type - an identifier of the type of the described information resource
I would like to suggest again that these indexes intended for re-use
be regarded as refinements of the ServerChoice index already defined
in the cql context set.
|