Re: new iafa draft

Thomas Krichel <T.Krichel@surrey.ac.uk> Fri, 12 January 1996 16:37 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11469; 12 Jan 96 11:37 EST
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11465; 12 Jan 96 11:37 EST
Received: from services.Bunyip.COM by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08433; 12 Jan 96 11:37 EST
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) id LAA23363 for iafa-out; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:35:18 -0500
Received: from mocha.bunyip.com (mocha.Bunyip.Com [192.197.208.1]) by services.bunyip.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA23355 for <iafa@services.bunyip.com>; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:35:13 -0500
Received: from mailb.surrey.ac.uk by mocha.bunyip.com with SMTP (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2b/CC-Guru-2b) id AA13555 (mail destined for iafa@services.bunyip.com); Fri, 12 Jan 96 11:34:47 -0500
Received: from central.surrey.ac.uk by mailb.surrey.ac.uk with SMTP (PP); Fri, 12 Jan 1996 16:33:57 +0000
Received: by central.surrey.ac.uk (1.37.109.8/16.2) id AA22111; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 16:33:54 GMT
Message-Id: <9601121633.AA22111@central.surrey.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: new iafa draft
To: Jon Knight <J.P.Knight@lut.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 16:33:53 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: iafa@bunyip.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960112100043.28865B-100000@weeble.lut.ac.uk> from "Jon Knight" at Jan 12, 96 10:10:44 am
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Thomas Krichel <T.Krichel@surrey.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Thomas Krichel <T.Krichel@surrey.ac.uk>
X-Org.: Department of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 5XH, UK
X-Tel.: 44-(0)1483-300800x2785, Fax: 44-(0)1483-303775, Ethnic origin: Saarland
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UK-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Length: 919
X-Orig-Sender: owner-iafa@bunyip.com
Precedence: bulk

  Jon writes:

> This I think is a very important point; the big advantage of IAFA is that
> it is simple to encode and most people can easily get to grips with it. 

  From my experience of trying to get people to encode their own resources,
  this point can not be overemphasised.

> I've a feeling that all the URC/metadata efforts are going to hit this 
> problem where you want to keep things simple for new users but still 
> offer a reasonable complete set of attributes (or an upgrade path to 
> another format) for more advanced cataloguers.

  I agree. A case could be made to establish authorities that
  would check and transform the records into an orderly catalogue.
  This could be subject based and could also organise the attribution
  of URNs.



  Thomas Krichel                               mailto:T.Krichel@surrey.ac.uk
                                  http://www.surrey.ac.uk/Economics/tkrichel