Subject: Re: Merge GILS
Becks, Virginia (VBecks@DTIC.MIL)
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:14:35 -0500
Message-Id: <57AAB5A137EED011826700805FEAA92B3C8A3E@hq.dtic.mil> From: "Becks, Virginia" <VBecks@DTIC.MIL> To: "'gils@cni.org'" <gils@cni.org> Subject: Re: Merge GILS Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:14:35 -0500
On Wed, Feb 11, 1998, Philip Coombs <pcoombs@wln.com> wrote:
>
> I appreciate the effort to merge GILS into bib-1. May I offer a
> suggestion?
>
> For those of us embedding the GILS attributes in the <HEAD> of HTML
> documents, use of technical and often cryptic attribute terms like
> "uncontrolled term" is counter-productive. First, the authors and
> Webmasters coding their documents haven't a clue what these are.
> Second, the major search engines ignore the value's increased
> importance
> in these unrecognized metatags. Why couldn't we call it "keywords"?
> ditto for subject-terms-controlled --> "subjects". ditto for abstract
> --> "description". As long as we have some license to modify our
> attribute set, can we jump on the opportunity to improve it?
>
> Otherwise, we have no objection to associating the bib-1 number to the
> GILS terms.
DTIC has already done this with our website form at
http://www.defenselink.mil/locator/web_form.html
We have substituted simple terms on the form to make GILS
registration less cumbersome for the services. For example, Philip's
exact suggestion, "Keywords" is used for "Local Subject Index." However,
the html contains the hidden value for Keywords (Local Subject Term)
which is printed in the actual record display to allow DTIC to remain
GILS compliant. Furthermore, to eliminate the need for input by the
submitter we've incorporated several filled in hidden mandatory
defaulted fields such as Purpose, Agency Program, Access and Use
constraints which are only displayed in the final record
submission/display.
Virginia Becks
DTIC
vbecks@dtic.mil
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a16 : Tue Mar 23 1999 - 03:55:41 EST