At 10:00 AM 1/19/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>One solution would be to reword the statement of semantics once again by
>separating the "as expressed in a given national or local scheme," making
>it clear that it applies to both general and specific and stating it in
>terms of a sort of "best practice"? Thus, the semantics might read as
>follows:
>
>"A general statement describing the education or training sector.
>Alternatively, a more specific statement of the location of the audience
>in terms of its progression through am education or training sector.
>Where available, such statements should be expressed in terms of
>a recognized national or local scheme."
This works for me--much clearer!
>However, this point raises a VERY interesting question regarding DC-Ed
>as an "application profile." In such a profile, can a DC working group
>actually restrict application of DC general principles in terms of the
>domain under
>consideration. In other words, can a working group decide that "best
>practices" _dictate_ the use of scheme's or a particular scheme?
"Best practices" should be just that--suggestions for how to do it right
(in some cases, perhaps, STRONG suggestions). Let's remember that DC is
and should remain "simple" resource discovery, and in that context,
"dictating" schemes is probably a bad idea. Any resource description has
it's reward/punishment aspects--the better it is, the better it will point
users to the resource. Poor or malformed descriptions will condemn
resources to the black holes of the internet, no matter what we "dictate."
Diane
|