On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>
> > 3. Specification as to how to create DC instance metadata
> > (including elements, qualifiers and schemes) in RDF/XML as per
> > the schema in (2)
>
> The wording here is a little hard to follow, but I think you mean guidelines
> for using DC elements, qualifiers, etc. in RDF (written in XML). If so,
> agreed.
I think I mean something more terse than guidelines... more like a number
of examples of how to express Dc in RDF/XML.
>
> > 4. Canonical expression of DC schema in XML schema language (with
> > canonical URI to identify this expression of the schema)
>
> What kind of things would this XML schema say -- and what documents would it
> describe? As far as I know, there really isn't a whole lot for XML schema to
> express about DC.
It would not say a lot, it would not describe a 'document' but express DC
elements, qualifiers in a schema with cardinality and data-typing.... Dc
v1.1 has been expressed in such a schema already.
The main point is to have a single URI which points to an autoritative
XML schema (or schemas if qualifiers, schemes are in separate schemas)
At present the number of 'official' XML schemas people have to point at
for various implementations is growing. For example the OAI DC schema,
the CIMI based XML schema for Z39.50 Bath profile, no doubt more are
following.
This means that 'instance metadata' (descriptions) created compliant to
OAI reference the OAI XML schema, metadata compliant to Bath Profile
reference the Bath profile schema etc
>
> > 5. Canonical expression of DC schema in XML DTD, *not* expressed as
> > RDF/XML.
> > 6. Specification as to how to create DC instance metadata (including
> > elements, qualifiers and schemes) in XML as per the schema in (4) and DTD
> > in (5).(I do hope it would look the same!) This instance metadata to be
> > XML compliant, but not RDF/XML compliant.
>
> It seems to me sort of silly to require us to do something, specifically not
> in a certain way. What's wrong with RDF/XML?
The reason we need XML (as well as RDF/XML) is that a lot of tools cannot
handle RDF/XML. I agree there is nothing wrong with RDF/XML, that is not
the issue.
Altho DC supports RDF/XML can we mandate syntax?? I think not, therefore
it seems to me DCMI should provide advice etc for XML expression.
>
> I'd like to suggest two which I feel are vitally important:
>
> B. An RDF/XML encoding of the formal specification in 9.
I am not sure how this differs from the second item on my list....
2. Canonical expression of DC schema in RDF schema language (with
canonical URI to identify this expression of the schema)
??
rachel
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rachel Heery
UKOLN (UK Office for Library and Information Networking)
University of Bath tel: +44 (0)1225 826724
Bath, BA2 7AY, UK fax: +44 (0)1225 826838
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
|