Print

Print


On Sep 29, 2005, at 1:23 PM, Rebecca S. Guenther wrote:

> I would prefer to do the easiest thing right now. If there are  
> compelling
> reasons later to do something more complex (like making a new  
> schema for
> date), fine. We did say we weren't going to change PREMIS for a  
> year after
> its release; we are changing the schema nonetheless because  
> versioning it
> is a compelling reason (and correcting some errors). And I do  
> believe that
> there are some implementations out there now.
>
> So to me the easiest thing is to just use 2 different names for  
> this date
> type in the different schemas. objectDateType and eventDateType
>
> Other opinions?
>

Responsible Opposing Viewpoint/Voice of Experience: If you don't change
it for a year, people will change their local copy of the schema to  
do the
customizations they want.  If you define two different date types,  
some percentage
of folks will customize those date types *differently*.  They will be  
the ones
screaming bloody murder in a year's time when you propose using a  
single,
consolidated type for all dates.


Jerome McDonough, Asst. Professor
Graduate School of Library & Information Science
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
501 E. Daniel Street, Room 202
Champaign, IL 61820
(217) 244-5916
[log in to unmask]