I have transferred the content of this email to the wiki - see http://efgblade.cs.umb.edu/twiki/bin/view/SDD/ChangeName
It would be *much* better if any comments are made through the wiki, and voting (though this may be a trivial example) is conducted there. If any luddites insist on carrying on a conversation on the list, I will laboriously transfer it all to the wiki.
Cheers - k
----- Original Message ----- From: "Gregor Hagedorn" G.Hagedorn@BBA.DE To: TDWG-SDD@LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 3:03 AM Subject: InternalNotes/ReportedNotes [Request for voting]
In the current version of the SDD schema we have:
InternalNotes: A single element for all languages, intended for internal documentation, annotations, memos during the development process of either the terminology or descriptions. This is sort of like a scrap page for authors or editors.
ReportedNotes: Free form notes/comments/annotations that address the consumer of descriptive data. Multiple representations for each audience/language addressed are available.
The pair InternalNotes/ReportedNotes is intended to express the fact that Internal Notes are not usually published, whereas reported notes are an essential part of the descriptive data.
I am currently thinking about whether different element names may be more acceptable or intuitive.
- Using Annotation instead of InternalNotes
- Using FreeFormText instead of ReportedNotes.
We could use Notes instead of ReportedNotes, but I find the pair Annotation/Notes easily confusible.
Please do "vote" on this issue on the email list!
Gregor
Gregor Hagedorn (G.Hagedorn@bba.de) Institute for Plant Virology, Microbiology, and Biosafety Federal Research Center for Agriculture and Forestry (BBA) Koenigin-Luise-Str. 19 Tel: +49-30-8304-2220 14195 Berlin, Germany Fax: +49-30-8304-2203
Often wrong but never in doubt!