On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > A machine-readable value would make it easier to retrieve them with
>> > high recall, for example. Maybe there are different LCSH (or other)
>> > URI's, such as http://id.loc.gov/authorities/sh20something that could
>> > be helpful for such kinds of dates.
>> But why on earth would you need to search for "first Thursday of
> I don't think it is a matter of searching, I think Saašha is suggesting that there is value in being able to represent it in authoritative form, so for example, let's say there is a controlled vocabulary, including the term 'firstThursdayOfFebruary'. Then a machine encountering this term would know what it means, whereas if the machine encountered '1stThursInFebruary' it wouldn't.
> However, I don't see what value there is in the machine understanding "first Thursday of February". There may be applications where this is useful, but I would think that for our purposes a human-readable expression is sufficient. I think we would need Ed to elaborate the requirement.
> I want to point out further, if the suggestion is that there would be authority records for these expressions analogous to those I described in a different thread on temporals: I have no idea where they would come from but I can pretty much guarantee not from LC.
My point is simply that use cases really need to be pretty specific.
It can't be vague "nice to have" features without crystal clear