>>>Ann Apps said:
> Renato Iannella <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > No, I'm the one that does not want to see _any_ RDF in the _XML_
> > encoding.
> >
> > The _RDF_ will appear in the _RDF/XML_ encoding document
> >
> > Don't confuse the market. Deliver what the industry wants.
> >
> I second this. If I read an XML Guide, I wouldn't expect it to contain
> RDF. I would expect to write things like <dc:title>My
> Title</dc:title> without any encompassing <rdf:...> tags.


The XML encoding is RDF but that adds a between 1-3 more 'boilerplate'
lines than could be expected in an XML document.  The current profile
suggests 3, but it could be 1 as I explain below

> To find out how to encode DC in RDF I would expect to read an
> RDF Guide (or maybe an RDF in XML Guide).

This will be needed in due course for handling DC qualifiers etc. as
being discussed in the other threads.   This profile should work
as-is when the model including qualifiers is deployed.

> It sounds to me that by writing an XML Guide which includes RDF
> you are coercing unsuspecting people to think they have to use
> RDF even if they don't understand it. (But perhaps that's just my
> paranoia showing through!) If the RDF tags are just presented with
> no explanation then I don't think the reason for including them in
> encoded metadata would be obvious, so people are likely to ignore
> the guide.

Coercion?  No!  The DC is a community and a foundation that people in
many domains are using because it works.  I've gone into a lot of the
technical detail of the design of this document here and on the
issues list to show why we are doing things this way; I really don't
think all of this should appear in the end-user document!

If the rdf: things need more explanation, how about this:

The meaning of this simple format is:
   a container of DC elements describing a resource

where <rdf:Description> is the container element and the rdf:about
attribute is where you specify which resource (when it is a URI).  We
use RDF because that is a good web metadata Framework for Describing
Resources.


On the syntax side, it turns out that rdf:RDF is optional and it
could be removed from the DTD.  Then, is there really so much
difference between these examples?

RDF version 1

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?
<!DOCTYPE rdf:Description SYSTEM "http://dublincore.org/............dcxml.dtd">
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.ilrt.bristol.ac.uk/people/cmdjb/"
                 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
                 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <dc:title>Dave Beckett's Home Page</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Dave Beckett</dc:creator>
  <dc:publisher>ILRT, University of Bristol</dc:publisher>
  <dc:date>2000-06-06</dc:date>
</rdf:Description>

XML version 1

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?
<!DOCTYPE dcxml:container SYSTEM "http://dublincore.org/............dcxml.dtd">
<dcxml:container dcxml:href="http://www.ilrt.bristol.ac.uk/people/cmdjb/"
                 xmlns:dcxml="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <dcxml:title>Dave Beckett's Home Page</dcxml:title>
  <dcxml:creator>Dave Beckett</dcxml:creator>
  <dcxml:publisher>ILRT, University of Bristol</dcxml:publisher>
  <dcxml:date>2000-06-06</dcxml:date>
</dcxml:container>

or tidying some namespaces:

RDF version 2

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE rdf:Description SYSTEM "http://dublincore.org/............dcxml.dtd">
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.ilrt.bristol.ac.uk/people/cmdjb/"
                 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
                 xmlns="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>Dave Beckett's Home Page</title>
  <creator>Dave Beckett</creator>
  <publisher>ILRT, University of Bristol</publisher>
  <date>2000-06-06</date>
</rdf:Description>

XML version 2

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE container SYSTEM "http://dublincore.org/............dcxml.dtd">
<container href="http://www.ilrt.bristol.ac.uk/people/cmdjb/"
           xmlns="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>Dave Beckett's Home Page</title>
  <creator>Dave Beckett</creator>
  <publisher>ILRT, University of Bristol</publisher>
  <date>2000-06-06</date>
</container>


> I hope it is also planned to write an HTML (and an XHTML) Guide,
> because in reality that's what most people are still using.

There are lots of issues about encoding DC in (X)HTML such as hiding
content, supporting repeating elements (that means can't use XML
attributes for that), encoding issues, interaction with <meta> and
<link>, <head profile>?.  The document here was intended to be for
standalone XML with a DTD (i.e. is also SGML) and not embedded.

Dave