Hi Tod,
One of the functional requirements of the registry application is to output
the DC terms as schemas encoded in various metadata standards (currently RDF
and XML).
The registry application itself is not dependent on what is at the end of
the DC namespaces. This is an architecture issue which I do not believe has
any effect on the registry.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Harry
-----Original Message-----
From: Tod Matola [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2001 1:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [POLL] What is at the end of the namespace?
Rachel Heery wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Oct 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote:
>
>
>>It's a good practice, IMO, and I see no reason to stop. If you
>>want to argue that we should, take it to some W3C list, not the
>>Dublin Core itself.
>>
>
>
> I do think the issue of how to manage the DC namespaces and vocabulary
> is a matter for this list ...??
I thought it was the job of this list to debate the possible candidates
and return a recommandation. Which may or may not be acted on by other
parts of DCMI.
> and I am curious as to how we could sensibly
> manage resolution of the three Dublin Core namespaces by means of RDDL
> in a way that enables terms identified by all three to be related.
>
So are you suggesting we dereference the namespace to a Registry query?
I think the RDDL suggestion isn't intended to be a the end all solution
(w.r.t. management of the namespaces), but rather a step in the right
direction.
Are the current proposed management systems (e.g., DCMI registry) being
designed with RDFS as an assumption or will they support: DTDs, XML
schema, XHTML modules,..., <insert future sematic markup schema du
jour>? As Partick points out the namespace URI is not a 1-1 mapping of
the encoding and RDDL gives a little bit of wiggle room.
Cheers Tod
--
Ask not for whom the <CONTROL-G> tolls.
|