Second guessing

Displaying 1 to 7 of 7 matches.
SoopySue
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Oct 25, 2008 3:38AM

I just just checking out an older file and found the keyword Caracalla. I thought that was bizarre, so went in to edit it, not having a clue how it got there.


Discovered that "UNESCO World Heritage Site", which used to be in the CV, now maps only to Caracalla, which is a Roman bath site. Please note that I joined here sometime after the CV was introduced - I'd say this change has been made sometime in the past year.


The change makes no sense. I remember getting an email around four years ago asking for permission to use two pics from my personal website "in a book about World Heritage Sites", so that could be a term someone would search on.


What a pain: do 'they' really think I'm going to go through my work and remove a perfectly valid term from many pics, only to put it back in again when it's fixed. I certainly never got an email or saw any notices about the change.


I've read other people say this has happened to them, and although I never posted, I must admit I was privately sceptical (SORRY!) Of course I'm sitemailling Jordan, but given their backlog it could be months before anything is done: or nothing may be done.


I'd love an explanation of the 'logic' which made this change.
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:19AM
This happens quite a few times, a general term mapping to a specific example, which renders the term pretty useless. Cf. bunting = snow bunting (not!).
SoopySue
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Oct 25, 2008 4:37AM
Posted By Whiteway:
This happens quite a few times, a general term mapping to a specific example, which renders the term pretty useless. Cf. bunting = snow bunting (not!).

Oh, absolutely: I'm probably Jordan's most verbose penpal - but this one has changed - yet I can't get them to change 'monkey' from offering 'did you mean monkey or ape -which is (as you know) sort of like keywording 'red' then being asked if you really wanted red or purple.
Joesboy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:32AM
Hi Liz
I just got back from South Africa and am hitting the CV impasse also. I see little or no hope without a major re-think. I recently had keywords changed also by another contributor and protested but haven't had a response yet. As I've said before, I sent them a flat file with all the Edmonds birds names and I thought it would be a simple task to put it into the CV but evidently it must involve more than I can comprehend.
But, it seems pretty arbitrary to me to change a contributors keywords without an opportunity to present one's reason for the selection in the first place.

Posted By Whiteway:
This happens quite a few times, a general term mapping to a specific example, which renders the term pretty useless. Cf. bunting = snow bunting (not!).


A good example. Couldn't they a least present the mapping in alphabetical order, birds, mountains and rivers have so many mappings that they are generally useless.


OK, I'll take my meds and go back to sleep'


Cheers
SoopySue
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Oct 25, 2008 6:56AM
/
/
I just got back from South Africa and am hitting the CV impasse also. I see little or no hope without a major re-think. I recently had keywords changed also by another contributor and protested but haven't had a response yet. As I've said before, I sent them a flat file with all the Edmonds birds names and I thought it would be a simple task to put it into the CV but evidently it must involve more than I can comprehend.


Teehee. As I think i mentioned, I use the Clements' list, and there are quite considerable differences, plus they are constantly being changed. I also use the Kingdon listing for African mammal systematics, but there are alternatives, again with considerable differences, especially in the smaller mammals.
Joesboy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:47AM

Teehee. As I think i mentioned, I use the Clements' list, and there are quite considerable differences, plus they are constantly being changed. I also use the Kingdon listing for African mammal systematics, but there are alternatives, again with considerable differences, especially in the smaller mammals.


Oops! I meant Clements' list, but where did it go? Also having a lot of fun with flora. It's going to be a long, cold winter.


Best
Whiteway
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:20AM
In another thread, I mentioned that iStock doesn't have an English hart. (It does have harts in German and Polish.) As a result, it is not possible to tag 'hart' for a young stag in the CV.

I'd forgotten this nearly-related example. It is not possible to tag a hind (female red deer) in the CV, because 'hind' goes to 'Rear view'.
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 7 of 7 matches.
Not a member?Join