Print

Print


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.