On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 16:04, Rob Sanderson <azar...@liverpool.ac.uk> wrote:
> * One namespace is used to define two _totally_ separate sets of
> elements.  There's no reason why this can't be done.

As opposed to all the reasons for not doing it. :) This is crap design
of a higher magnitude, and the designers should be either a) whipped
in public and thrown out in shame, or b) repent and made to fix the
problem. Even I would opt for the latter, but such a simple task not
being done seems to suggest that perhaps the former needs to be put in

> * One namespace defines so many elements that it's meaningless to call
> it a format at all.  Even though the top level tag might be the same,
> the contents are so varied that you're unable to realistically process
> it.

Yeah, don't use MODS in general; it's a hack. It's even crazier still
that many versions have the same namespace. What were they thinking?!

Anyway, even if the namespace is botched, you can still (if I'll dare
go by the Topic Maps moniker) have multiple namespaces for the same
subject (the format in question), and simply publish and use your own
and let the TM mechanics handle the ambiguity for you. If enough
people do this, and perhaps even use your unofficial identifiers,
maybe LOC will see the errors of their ways and repent.


 Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------

Reply via email to