Talk:CATTXT

raphael 21:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC): What is the name proposed for this attribute?

Concerning the acronym, S57 uses CATCON for attribute "Category of Conveyor".

Was the name supposed to be Category of Completeness (CATCOM)?

(If you want suggestions for alternatives, all I can think of are Category of Text (CATTXT) or

Concerning allowed values: "abstract", "extract", "full text", "summary" look all right. (I will look up condensation and see if we need that too.) "completeness" is not the same kind of thing, it is a description of the attribute rather than an allowed value.

jens 12:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC) As I stated, that attribute is a proposal. I haven't considered the existing CATCON. I haven't got any objections agains renaming that to "category of text". The idea for this attribute was to indicate to the reader the nature of the content. It is likely that one can provide two different categories of text, the first one can be the "extract" the second can be the more comprehensive "full text". Depends on the particular interest one can check the extract and if necessary to have more information the full text.

raphael 15:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC): I'm dropping "condensation". "Abstract" and "summary are not quite the same, but they are close enough in meaning that we could combine them (and reduce encoder labour in deciding whether something is an abstract or a summary). The allowed values would then become:

1: abstract or summary: A statement summarizing the important points of a text
2: extract: An excerpt or excerpts from a text
3: full text: The whole text

jens 17:57, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
sounds good, I was expecting that an English expert will check the proposal. Thank you Raphael. I am at home at the moment but will try to adjust the UML and jpg tomorrow. If you agree with renaming this attribute to CATTXT I will do this tomorrow as well. Pls confirm here.

raphael 18:54, 14 June 2010 (UTC): Agreed. I think we overlooked text written by the HO itself. Should that be coded as "full text" or by the absence of this attribute?

SNPWG 04:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
moved from CATCON to CATTXT;

DavidAcland 15:15, 8 August 2011 (UTC) I am not convinced by the bit which says "...the most important part of regulations ...". I will soften it a bit.

raphael 05:43, 3 August 2012 (UTC): The label of value 2 should be "Extract".

jens 09:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Done.

raphael (talk) 03:34, 2 February 2017 (CET): Definition needed, not currently defined on main page and registry has just 'category of text'.

Proposed definition: Classification of textual information in relation to the source material from which it is derived.