Dan Brickley wrote:
>
> What I would like to see on this list are some implementors claiming
> victory w.r.t. the current proposed RDF/DCQ spec! Are we done yet? Hands
> up anybody who feels they've got it implemented (in whole or part...).
Hello everybody!
for the ETB (European Treasury Browser) project [1] we are using the
RDF/DCQ draft proposal to express our metadata records and CLDs
containing a mixture of DC/DCQ/DCEDU and some custom elements such as
requirements and price [2]; we are also trying to write a DTD to
validate records before posting them to the NNTP network [3]
Our tools seem to like the proposed syntax :)
Any comments/corretions on our interpretation about the draft document
are welcome!
best regards
Alberto
[1] http://etb.eun.org
[2] http://etbdemo.jrc.it/metadata/example.xml
[3] http://etbdemo.jrc.it/metadata/etbmes.dtd