|
|
Chris,
> I'm trying to get my head around all the language stuff at
> the moment and I'm a bit confused by the above in as much as
> it seems to contradict the XML RDF proposals regarding
> language [1] where dc:language _is_ used for the language of
> an element of the description in addition to being used to
> describe the language of a resource.
I think in section 4.2 (the "poor man's language qualification") in [1],
two resources are explicitly separated out:
- the (anonymous) resource being described (i.e. the resource whose
dc:creator is "Karl Mustermann")
- a second anonymous resource which is the dc:subject of the first
resource (the "subject term", if you like - though it isn't typed as
such)
This second resource is given a dc:language property with value "en".
It's necessary to do this in RDF/XML because xml:lang isn't
"visible"/"exposed" to an RDF application (as noted in section 4.1 of
[1]).
This appears to be a current issue for the RDF Core WG. See
http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-xmllang
At the XML level (which is what the draft DC in XML guidelines [2] are
aiming at) xml:lang _is_ available/visible to the application.
Pete
[1] http://www.dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/30/dcq-rdf-xml/#sec4
[2] http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/dc-xml-guidelines/
|
|
|
|