On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Rachel Heery wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Sigfrid Lundberg, Lub NetLab wrote:
>
> >
> > > http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1 and
> > > http://purl.org/dc/qualifiers/
> > > http://purl.org/dc/types/
> > >
> > Can we regard this issue as settled? I feel that it is. The documenation
> > on elements, element sets, qualifiers etc will be maintained according to
> > the guidelines that has previously been settled in the dcmi usage
> > committe.
>
> Please can you clarify for me... are you suggesting we use one namespace
> for all and any qualifiers that implementors use to qualify DC
> elements?
Please, we are not going to conquer the world and put all implementors'
qualifiers in our namespaces. I'm specifically talking about vocabularies
maintained by us, and in particular our name space URIs.
> And that we distinguish recommended from non-recommended by use of
> annotations or press releases??
Non-recommended ones shouldn't live here at all. Presumably their name
space URIs should have their home in the implementions using them.
> Rachel
Sigge
|