[Talk-ca] CanVec:CODE vs. CanVec:UUID -relevancy
acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com
Fri Jun 26 23:40:27 BST 2009
Im sending it out to everyone, as its of international significance when
dealing with bulk data.
The 4 general tags
attribution=Natural Resources Canada
- tells the users what agency it came from (public/private)
- tell the user what program was used to create it. ... ie. blame me if the
script doesnt work or is wrong.
-tells the user what import project session it is ... ie. next year we might
do an import again for the updates.
- is the 'lot number / series and actual product identifier, more detailed
than the bar code (' which tells the user the identity of each node/way/area
they are looking at.
The 5th, which is currently being debated
- This is the feature identifier, the SKU (Stock keeping unit) or the BIB
(Library catelogue number). This tells the user which
Library/floor/section/shelf/book/page number that they are looking at. When
the UUID identifies each character on the page.
Not having this CODE, would be like going to the library and asking if they
have a word in a book of 11CF43756692E5F4E0409C8467120387, when the CODE is
human-readable. The 0 at the end means its a NODE a 1 - means a way and a 2
means an area. The 120 at the begining means it's part of the 1200009 series
of features. and the '2' means it's the 2nd feature type in the set.
Like identifing 2 identical books, 'Times Atlas' where they has different
UUID's, but the same Catelogue code.
So does anyone have objections to the logic and usefullness behind me
keeping canvec:CODE? Or any arguments for/against what i wrote above?..
And at the same time im recommending for all imports that this gets added
(it its available).
Across Canada Trails
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-ca