On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Rachel Heery wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2002, Makx Dekkers wrote:
>
> > I was wondering if there were any further comments on Rostislav's
> > new draft. One point that I noted is that the date in the document
> > has not changed from the previous version, and that it is not clear
> > to me what changes were applied as a result of the discussion on the
> > previous version. I would also think that the title should be
> > something like "Representing Simple Dublin Core in X.500 and LDAP".
>
> A comment not on substantive content but on 'vaocabulary labelling'..
>
> I think we should avoid use of the expression 'Simple Dublin Core' as it
> is not defined (as far as I can tell?). I would prefer 'Representing the
> DCMES in X500 and LDAP'
?? - didn't we just have a loonngggg discussion about this on
dc-architecture ending with
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0203&L=dc-architecture&F=&S=&P=9468
It seemed to me that we reached some concensus on the issue of what
'Simple Dublin Core' is in that discussion. Perhaps not?
'Simple Dublin Core' already appears in the title of (at least) one draft
DCMI recommendation
Expressing Simple Dublin Core in RDF/XML
http://dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/28/dcmes-xml/
'Simple Dublin Core' is defined in section 4.1 of
Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core in XML
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/dc-xml-guidelines/
Both documents have been up for comment for a significant period :-(
For what it is worth, I would like to see 'Simple Dublin Core' defined in
a separate document - a DCMI glossary perhaps.
Andy
--
Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell +44 1225 383933
Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
|