The opposite of having a theo context set is not having a theo context
set. The reason for my proposal  was just that I would prefer to relate
a context set to the organisation that is  responsible for its
maintenance. It looked to me that the SRU/W group  could take
responsibility for the combination of current core index names from dc,
dcterms and bath and that we could leave application specific context
sets to other organisations.
But I do not want to  make this an issue.

Theo


>>> [log in to unmask] 17-01-2005 15:59 >>>
> Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:05:35 +0100
> From: Theo van Veen <[log in to unmask]>
>
>> This is _good_ news for you, Theo.  Although I think your idea is a
>> bad one, there is nothing I or anyone else can do to stop you
>> making the "theo" set, defined precisely how you wish
>> (e.g. including synonyms for all the DC, Bath, etc. indexes) and
>> making that the default context set for your application.  Go nuts.
>
> The reason for my proposal was that I wanted the opposite.

"The opposite" sounds exactly the same to me.

What exactly is it that you want that a "theo" context set won't give
you?

 _/|_
_______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]>
http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "Any statements to the effect that this parrot is still a
         going concern are henceforth inoperative" -- _Dead Parrot_
         sketch, Monty Python's Flying Circus.

--
Listen to free demos of soundtrack music for film, TV and radio
        http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/soundtrack/