Dear DC architects!
At the DC-8 workshop in Ottawa, we had an open brain storming session
the last day. The discussion was meant for setting the DCMI Agenda for
the coming year. I got the Agenda 2000 entries from Stu Weibel the
other day.
I'd like to have your opinions on them, and whether we need to worry
about them. Having removed points which didn't seem to be
"architectural", this is what I have left:
1. External linking conventions
2. Use the new paradigms available in XML such as hierarchy
3. Be open to other non-XML expressions
4. An agreed terminology for mapping between the simple and complex
models
5. Internationalisation, multi-lingual issues are crucial [being
addressed in dc in multiple languages wg, registry activity]
6. What happened to structured values - I want to discuss this
7. Agent core will probably need structured values (value components)
and wants to know more about why they were change
8. A full list of the official documents of DC with their
status, responsibility
Comments:
---------
Some of these I don't really know what they mean, like 1 (is it about
the socalled "authority linking"?) and 4.
6 and 7 is about the structured value problems. As I understand it, it
is more or less a misunderstanding that DC won't support structured
values. However, if something is to have a complex value, that value
has to be an encoding scheme. To me, this does not seem to be a problem for
any structured syntax. Is this also your interpretation?
Point 2, then. Is there more to that one, than is implied by allowing
structured encoding schemes?
Then we have the one that means work... Number 8. I think we are doing
quite well, but we need more volunteers for one document
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/resources/dc/datamodel/WD-dc-rdf/
Yours,
Sigge
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|