[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2
- To: Howard Flack <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2
- From: Sydney Hall <[email protected]>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 08:38:27 +0800
- Cc: Ulrich Mueller <[email protected]>,Mois Aroyo <[email protected]>,"John R.Helliwell" <[email protected]>,Peter Strickland <[email protected]>,Helen Berman <[email protected]>,Nicola Ashcroft <[email protected]>,Michael Glazer <[email protected]>,Howard Einspahr <[email protected]>, Brian McMahon <[email protected]>
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Howard: These comments on the draft recommendations are welcomed of course... but even more welcome are suggested rewordings of 1(b) and (c) that would satisfy your concerns. These will be easier for the rest of the working group to compare and discuss. Perhaps the "text and data" issues you raise in your first paragraph can be covered in the preamble. Cheers Syd ------ Professor Sydney R. Hall School Biomedical & Chemical Sciences University of Western Australia Crawley, 6009 AUSTRALIA. Ph: +61 (8) 6488 2725 Fx: +61 (8) 6488 1118 "Data data everywhere but not a thought to think!" - Theodore Roszak On 19/07/2005, at 5:55 PM, Howard Flack wrote: > ITOWGites, > > I'm somewhat unhappy that these draft recommendations convey the > impression that the only way forward for IT, and IT online, is by way > of an internet-based server dealing with specific enquiries. I am in > entire agreement that such services need to be developed. These are > particularly appropriate for "data" applications. However a > significant part of IT is text and, in my view, IT online must provide > enabling technology to distribute this text for reading and study > offline on the current and future generations of powerful handhelds > and laptops. > > Concerning general recommendation 1(b), it seems to me that the real > priority is to prepare data in a distribution-independent manner that > serves the distribution formats of current and future use. A format of > prime importance is a server tuned to specific enquiries. > > Concerning general recommendation 1(c), this is out-of-court for the > working group. It seems to me that the switch from bulk lithograph > printing to digital printing to print-on-demand is an operational and > economic one. The unit cost and selling price will increase of course. > If customers are prepared to pay, let them spend their money. > > H. >
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2 (Howard Flack)
- References:
- DRAFT recommendations v1.2 (Sydney Hall)
- Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2 (Howard Flack)
- Prev by Date: Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2
- Next by Date: Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2
- Prev by thread: Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2
- Next by thread: Re: DRAFT recommendations v1.2
- Index(es):

