Roland,
> What about the rdf:resource attribute in the DTD and the
> complexType's in the xml - schema?
Just to clarify....
I think you're saying that the description of simple DC at
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/dc-xml-guidelines/
in addition to the chracteristics Andy listed, specifies:
> Each value is a literal string.
whereas in
http://dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/28/dcmes-xml/
(a) the availability of the rdf:resource attribute on all 15 elements
means that the value can be a second resource;
and
(b) the mixed content models in the XML Schema (but not in the DTD,
which specifies #PCDATA?) are intended to allow for markup embedded
within element content. I think Dave Beckett acknowledged that schema in
the appendix was broken, but that doesn't detract from the point which I
think you are making
i.e. rdf:parseType="Literal" is not the same as "Each value is a literal
string", as I suggested towards the end of
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0203&L=dc-architecture&F=
&S=&P=6071
because (from RDF M&S)
> In RDF terms, a literal may have content that is XML markup but is not
further
> evaluated by the RDF processor
Is that the distinction you are emphasising please? i.e. those are the
two differences between the two "models" for simple DC in
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/dc-xml-guidelines/
and
http://dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/28/dcmes-xml/
?
Thanks
Pete
|