Skip to main content

Notice

We are in the process of rolling out a soft launch of the RDA website, which includes a new member platform. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Visitors may encounter functionality issues with group pages, navigation, missing content, broken links, etc. As you explore the new site, please provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Thank you for your understanding and support as we work through all issues as quickly as possible. Stay updated about upcoming features and functionalities: https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/

#130695

Dear Rolf and Markus,
sorry that I could not attend the meeting yesterday due to a collision.
Most of my concerns are addressed with the current solution.
But the discussion went a bit into a wrong direction due to
misunderstanding probably caused by my lack of precision here.
I was not talking about a serial number, which is usually an identifier
used by manufacturers inside a series. I was talking about the
identification of the series itself. This might be part of the string
for model name. But for identification purposes it would be better from
my point of view, to have an optional subfield ”seriesName’ of modelName.
BTW. refering to the discussion about uniqueness of serial numbers: very
often model name, series and serial number disambiguates this, but there
is of course no guarantee.