Andy wrote:
>
> These problems would indicate that we haven't developed a database that
> meets our functional requirements? That's why I suggested in a previous
> message that the schemas that we want to export from the registry
> database are the key thing. It is primarily the schema that determine the
> structure of the database.
>
Rachel wrote:
> > > > I think the issue is that one *can* imagine a 'DCMI vocabulary management
> > > > system' that is structured primarily to provide information about the DCMI
> > > > terms in human readable, user-friendly way, to assist the Usage Board in
> > > > its management of that vocabulary overtime, and to be able to export data
> > > > in a number of ways....that never touches 'schema'.
> > >
> > > The registry might not export anything to assist RDF/XML or "pure" XML
> > > implementations? We will not see RDFS nor XMLS ? Huch!
> >
> > That would be very sad I agree.
>
> I would guess that Roland was suggesting that the database nedds to export
> RDFS schema, and that therefore in does 'touch' 'schema'?
Yupp!
In case the 'knowledge' encoded 'somehow' in the database is not rich enough
we cannot export a 'schema'.
Roland
>
> Andy.
>
|