--On 2/3/00 11:51 PM +0000 Andy Powell wrote:
> In particular, a 'Role' qualifier (particularly a role qualifier that is
> itself qualified with a scheme) does *not* seem to me to fit into the 2
> qualifier principles. By that I mean that, while we can encode
>
> <meta name="DC.Contributor.Illustrator" content="Andy Powell">
>
> in HTML, we cannot encode
>
> <meta name="DC.Contributor.Role" content="...
>
> in the same way.
>
> I apologise for dropping into syntax, but this notion that we can somehow
> discuss semantics completely independently from syntax excapes me...
> ultimately it is very unhelpful because we simply have to be able to
> encode this stuff! :-(
This exactly why we separate Semantics from Syntax.
Just because you can't do it in HTML does not mean that it must
be rejected. That is just plain silly ;-)
You can quite easily do Role as a qualifier using Simon's well
crafted DCSV scheme [1].
That is:
< META NAME="DC.Contributor.Role" SCHEME="DCSV"
CONTENT="Value:Illustrator; Scheme:AAT" >
Remember, we have not defined the formal HTML encoding for DCQ.
The Datamodel WG is charged with doing that - and it can do that
when it gets the *requirements* from the Usage Committee.
Cheers...Renato <http://purl.net/net/renato>
Principal Research Scientist, DSTC <http://www.dstc.edu.au>
[1] http://purl.org/dc/documents/notes-cox-19990430.htm
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|