<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Alexander Dutton wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4E451EE9.8080700@oucs.ox.ac.uk" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Maybe should be: applicationClosingDate and perhaps
applicationOpeningDate and even
applicationInterviewNotificationByDate
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Yes, all makes sense (I think). The opening date is currently (well,
should be) encoded as dcterms:created, as I don't think the vacancy
opens any later than it's first published.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Disagree. I may be over designing, but it strikes me that the record
may be created, approved, then published. Or be created with a date for
publication. Not a big concern, but careful phrasing would allow a
wider scope of reuse.
<blockquote cite="mid:4E451EE9.8080700@oucs.ox.ac.uk" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">and the other end with: postEarliestStartDate postLatestStartDate
and postDuration
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I don't think we have these available in any sane form, but yes,
sensible things to define.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">also
-- full time, part time, temp, intern, maternity/paternity cover
etc. -- fixed contract? -- salary, hourly pay -- benefit (eg.
health cover, holidays etc.) -- bonuses?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Again, all good (if someone can come up with some sane model).
</pre>
</blockquote>
For these it may make sense to note that they're explicitly *not*
defined in this schema yet, and we're looking for usecases.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4E451EE9.8080700@oucs.ox.ac.uk" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><j.2:online>True</j.2:online> eh? <j.2:open>True</j.2:open> eh?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
"whether it's advertised on the website" and "whether the closing date
has passed". These (if we have them at all) should certainly be
xsd:booleans. It's arguable that the open stuff is redundant (and
potentially misleading) if we also have the actual closing date.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I think you'd be better losing 'open' as it's much safer to look at
dateranges, and surely 'online' is just the existance of a further
Information predicate?<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4E451EE9.8080700@oucs.ox.ac.uk" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Also needs something about requirements.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Yes. Not available to us unless we parse the Word document (*joy*).
Also, kudos to MailScanner. I'll know to look out for your fraud
attempts in future.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Mailscanner is Free Open Source software written by a team mate of
mine. I've forwarded the bug to him but it's a very unusual case so
probably not worth fixing.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.mailscanner.info/">http://www.mailscanner.info/</a><br>
He has a second tool, created to deal with the issue that mailscanner
(and other mail filters) generally won't allow really big attachments:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.zend.to/index.php">http://www.zend.to/index.php</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Christopher Gutteridge -- <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248">http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248</a>
You should read the ECS Web Team blog: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/">http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>