首页> 外文期刊>Records management journal >A comparison of MoReq and SAHKE metadata and functional requirements
【24h】

A comparison of MoReq and SAHKE metadata and functional requirements

机译:MoReq和SAHKE元数据和功能要求的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose - The article compares MoReq and Finnish SAHKE specifications to see their differences and similarities. Both MoReq and SAHKE set requirements to functionality and metadata of ERM systems and define a XML-scheme for exporting records from the systems. Thus, both specifications are quite similar in some sense. This article seeks to find out whether there is an easy way for harmonizing both.rnDesign/methodology/approach - The study is based on textual sources.rnFindings - MoReq and SAHKE are quite incompatible when one looks at data models, elements andrnfunctional requirements. There are also some similarities, but no clear path from one specification tornanother.rnPractical implications - There is no easy way for turning a SAHKE-approved system into MoReqrncertified system (or vice versa). Harmonizing SAHKE with MoReq would require major revisions inrnSAHKE and also a policy change in Finland.rnOriginality/value - Because the SAHKE specification is available only in Finnish, its content isrnlargely unknown outside the country. There are no similar studies.
机译:目的-本文比较了MoReq和芬兰SAHKE规范,以了解它们的异同。 MoReq和SAHKE都对ERM系统的功能和元数据设置了要求,并定义了一种从系统中导出记录的XML方案。因此,这两个规范在某种意义上是非常相似的。本文旨在找出是否有一种简便的方法来协调两者。设计/方法/方法-该研究基于文本来源。研究结果-当人们查看数据模型,元素和功能需求时,MoReq和SAHKE完全不兼容。也有一些相似之处,但是从一个规范到另一个规范没有明确的路径。实用意义-没有简单的方法可以将SAHKE批准的系统转换为MoReqrn认证的系统(反之亦然)。要与MoReq协调SAHKE,就需要对SAHKE进行重大修订,同时还需要在芬兰进行政策更改。rn原创/价值-由于SAHKE规范仅在芬兰可用,因此其内容在国外几乎是未知的。没有类似的研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号