Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Aha, funding the audio and video is a great idea. Meets Code4Lib
needs, and also meets sponsor advertising needs, because all the
videos and audio could go up with a capture of this content was
sponsored by Insert Vendor Here link. I think Bill's idea is great.
John Fereira wrote:
A Talis sponsorship of audio/video support: Not only benefits
attendees but benefits those that can't attend the conference
and can watch the audio/video captures after the conference.
Seems to me that #3 is a clear winner.
That does seem like a win-win option.
I second the notion for Fogel's book.
From: Code for Libraries [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Randy Metcalfe [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 10:42 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] release management
2008/10/29
Thank you, Owen! A few comments interspersed...
Stephens, Owen wrote:
Hi Karen,
Yes - the document on DCAP makes sense (this maybe the first time I've
ever uttered these words on a first reading of DCMI documentation - so
well done!)
wow
I would question what the benefit of doing a full
Karen,
I don't have anything useful to add, but just wanted to express my gratitude
and second Owen's comment that this document is very nicely done.
The breakdown of key components (e.g., functional requirements vs. domain model
vs. usage guidelines, etc.) is quite helpful, as is the diagram
Hi Michael:
Thanks for your email. No we haven't implemented any merging system.
Our software currently just tries to do clustering of
similar/identical records. We may consider creating a merge algorithm
that is generic, which might then be customized to make some of your
pointed
