On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:14 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>
>>
>> Aaron: I agree with Antoine. I like the distinction between SES (which equals
>> rdf:Datatype) and something a looser, maybe for mapping from one serialization
>> to another such as from MARC to ISBD. I think this should be separated from the
>> notion of an SES.
>
> Should we consider mapping between serializations and mapping between different data models and schemas to be separate functions? In library jargon, the latter is called "cross-walking" and it often changes more than the serialization -- there can be major modifications to underlying data structures in order to accommodate different community models.
This is an excellent point and I believe our thinking clarified a bit on this as the call developed. As I understood things, we discussed having a tightly defined SES that is an rdf:Datatype and something else, probably the DSP, that serves as a "serialization profile" that explicitly does not "crosswalk" but defines a data model that can be serialized into different formats. In other words, the DSP provides a guide or specification for serialization into specific formats, not from one data model to another.
Aaron
|