ubl-ndrsc — archive

RE: [ubl-ndrsc] NDR Checklist Clarification

From: Chee-Kai Chin
To: [email protected]
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 03:25:00 -0000

 MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

ubl-ndrsc message

[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [ubl-ndrsc] NDR Checklist Clarification

From: Chin Chee-Kai <[email protected]>
To: UBL LCSC <[email protected]>,       "CRAWFORD, Mark" <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 11:05:10 +0800 (SGT)

Ref Mark's response on no such thing as "qualifier representation
term", I wonder why "qualifier representation term" has been
carried along all the way from 0p70 till now.  I did a quick
scan over the spreadsheets and found empty values across
all the "qualifier representation term" columns.  So it did
seem redundant.

Mark, if as you said primary and secondary rep terms are
lexicalyl synonymous, would it be absolutely unambiguous
to just say "representation term"?  Or are there cases where
primary and secondary differences matter?

LC, depending on Mark's response to above, suggest we may either
rename the rep term and qualifier rep term columns, or
remove the qualifier rep term.  But let's hear from Mark first.

Best Regards,
Chin Chee-Kai
SoftML
Tel: +65-6820-2979
Fax: +65-6743-7875
Email: [email protected]
http://SoftML.Net/

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, CRAWFORD, Mark wrote:

>>The CCTS specifies primary and secondary representation terms.  
>>Both are lexically synonimous to "representation term".  There 
>>is no such thing as "qualifier representation term".  If LC has 
>>that in the spreadsheet, then they need to clarify and ensure
>>conformance with CCTS.
>>
>>