Roland,
> > 1. On the subject of interoperability, the place my applications
> > need to be interoperable is when supplying Z39.50 search results in
> > XML/DC conforming to the Bath Profile. This specifies using the CIMI
> > XML DTD for simple DC, which is not the same as the XML/DC included
> > in these guidelines. I am not suggesting DC follow the CIMI DTD, but
> > maybe something should be said about it in this document?
>
> I've never seen CIMI XML DTD for DC. Could you supply a ref?
>
From the Bath Profile:
http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/bath/bp-app-d.htm
> > Elsewhere (not in this document)
> > I've also seen 'dctype:Collection' which is promoting values of the
> > DCMI Type list to elements in their own right as well. This may be
> > all OK given namespaces, but I wonder if there has been DCMI
> > consensus on this.
>
> You want xml-schema bound metadata not using namespaces?
>
No. I understand that namespaces are necessary for XML. I'm
questioning using something which is a value in an encoding
scheme list as an XML element. But that is a question outside the
current document being reviewed.
> > 8. The distinction between simple, unqualified and qualified is not
> > immediately obvious, especially as 'simple' and 'unqualified' are
> > sometimes used as synonymous. I can see why it's been made. It is
> > caused by the fact that 'audience' is in dcterms, the rest of which
> > is element refinements.
>
> ...and encoding schemes and...(what may come)
But the encoding schemes are not in the dcterms namespace -
they are in the dcxml namespace.
Ann
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mrs. Ann Apps. Senior Analyst - Research & Development, MIMAS,
University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 6039 Fax: +44 (0) 0161 275 6040
Email: [log in to unmask] WWW: http://epub.mimas.ac.uk/ann.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|