Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Questions about QCodes

Expand Messages
  • misha.wolf@thomsonreuters.com
    At last Friday s IPTC teleconference we discussed whether there are circumstances when the full richness of QCodes can or should be constrained and/or whether
    Message 1 of 3 , May 19, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      At last Friday's IPTC teleconference we discussed whether there are circumstances when the full richness of QCodes can or should be constrained and/or whether shortcuts are ever justifiable.  I took an action to draft some questions for further discussion.  Here they are:
       
      1  Does or should the IPTC mandate that the values to be placed in some specified metadata containers be required to come from corresponding IPTC-defined schemes?
       
      2  If yes, then does or should the IPTC require that QCodes in any of these metadata containers use pre-defined aliases to represent the approved schemes, allowing receiving systems to interpret the values without a URI-comparison?
       
      3  May a provider, within an environment totally controlled by themselves, hardwire a correspondence between (some) schemes and aliases, allowing receiving systems to interpret (some) QCodes without a URI-comparison?
       
      4  May a provider, within an environment not totally controlled by themselves, hardwire a correspondence between (some) schemes and aliases, allowing receiving systems to interpret (some) QCodes without a URI-comparison?
       
      5  With the exception of cases mandated by the IPTC (see 2 above), should a receiving system be considered to be conformant if it interprets (some) QCodes without a URI-comparison?
       
      Regards,
      Misha
       
       

      This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and information company.
      Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Thomson Reuters.
    • kelvin_holland
      From the G2 Specification: It is not mandatory that the Scheme Authority maintains the complete list of codes making up a given scheme in any particular form,
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 14, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        From the G2 Specification:

        It is not mandatory that the Scheme Authority maintains the complete
        list of codes making up a given
        scheme in any particular form, e.g. as an XML file. It is sufficient
        that an unambiguous identifier is defined
        for each scheme a provider uses, and that this identifier is known to
        the customers of the news feed this
        provider offers.

        Kelvin

        --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, <misha.wolf@...> wrote:
        >
        > At last Friday's IPTC teleconference we discussed whether there are
        > circumstances when the full richness of QCodes can or should be
        > constrained and/or whether shortcuts are ever justifiable. I took an
        > action to draft some questions for further discussion. Here they are:
        >
        > 1 Does or should the IPTC mandate that the values to be placed in
        some
        > specified metadata containers be required to come from corresponding
        > IPTC-defined schemes?
        >
        > 2 If yes, then does or should the IPTC require that QCodes in any of
        > these metadata containers use pre-defined aliases to represent the
        > approved schemes, allowing receiving systems to interpret the values
        > without a URI-comparison?
        >
        > 3 May a provider, within an environment totally controlled by
        > themselves, hardwire a correspondence between (some) schemes and
        > aliases, allowing receiving systems to interpret (some) QCodes without
        a
        > URI-comparison?
        >
        > 4 May a provider, within an environment not totally controlled by
        > themselves, hardwire a correspondence between (some) schemes and
        > aliases, allowing receiving systems to interpret (some) QCodes without
        a
        > URI-comparison?
        >
        > 5 With the exception of cases mandated by the IPTC (see 2 above),
        > should a receiving system be considered to be conformant if it
        > interprets (some) QCodes without a URI-comparison?
        >
        > Regards,
        > Misha
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and
        information company.
        > Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
        sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views
        of Thomson Reuters.
        >
      • misha.wolf@thomsonreuters.com
        The only kind of unambiguous identifier we have is s URI. Misha ... From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        Message 3 of 3 , Jul 14, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          The only kind of unambiguous identifier we have is s URI.

          Misha


          -----Original Message-----
          From: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com] On
          Behalf Of kelvin_holland
          Sent: 14 July 2009 11:54
          To: newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [newsml-g2] Re: Questions about QCodes

          From the G2 Specification:

          It is not mandatory that the Scheme Authority maintains the complete
          list of codes making up a given
          scheme in any particular form, e.g. as an XML file. It is sufficient
          that an unambiguous identifier is defined
          for each scheme a provider uses, and that this identifier is known to
          the customers of the news feed this
          provider offers.

          Kelvin

          --- In newsml-g2@yahoogroups.com, <misha.wolf@...> wrote:
          >
          > At last Friday's IPTC teleconference we discussed whether there are
          > circumstances when the full richness of QCodes can or should be
          > constrained and/or whether shortcuts are ever justifiable. I took an
          > action to draft some questions for further discussion. Here they are:
          >
          > 1 Does or should the IPTC mandate that the values to be placed in
          some
          > specified metadata containers be required to come from corresponding
          > IPTC-defined schemes?
          >
          > 2 If yes, then does or should the IPTC require that QCodes in any of
          > these metadata containers use pre-defined aliases to represent the
          > approved schemes, allowing receiving systems to interpret the values
          > without a URI-comparison?
          >
          > 3 May a provider, within an environment totally controlled by
          > themselves, hardwire a correspondence between (some) schemes and
          > aliases, allowing receiving systems to interpret (some) QCodes without
          a
          > URI-comparison?
          >
          > 4 May a provider, within an environment not totally controlled by
          > themselves, hardwire a correspondence between (some) schemes and
          > aliases, allowing receiving systems to interpret (some) QCodes without
          a
          > URI-comparison?
          >
          > 5 With the exception of cases mandated by the IPTC (see 2 above),
          > should a receiving system be considered to be conformant if it
          > interprets (some) QCodes without a URI-comparison?
          >
          > Regards,
          > Misha
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and
          information company.
          > Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
          sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views
          of Thomson Reuters.
          >




          ------------------------------------

          Any member of this IPTC moderated Yahoo group must comply with the
          Intellectual Property Policy of the IPTC, available at
          http://www.iptc.org/goto/ipp. Any posting is assumed to be submitted
          under the conditions of this IPTC IP Policy.
          Yahoo! Groups Links





          This email was sent to you by Thomson Reuters, the global news and information company.
          Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Thomson Reuters.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.