On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Rachel Heery wrote:
> > If I can re-state my case. I think the term 'Simple DC' is potentially
> > ambiguous, and as it is being defined as synonymous with Dublin Core
> > Metadata Element Set V1.1 (DCMES), I think it would be more helpful to use
> > that more precise terminology, particularly in technical documents.
>
> I know Pete has already responded to this - but just to re-state what
> has already been said a number of times...
>
> We absolutely do NOT define 'Simple DC' as being synonymous with DCMES
> 1.1. See section 4.1 of
>
> http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/dc-xml-guidelines/
I very much like this definition of 'Simple DC' and think the
clarification has been extremely useful. However, I share
Rachel's concern that 'Simple DC' could be seen as as name
for a specific set of terms that has been declared forever
"frozen" in number.
I had been assuming this was not Andy and Pete's intent.
Rather, I had been reading the statement "Each property must
be one of the 15 DCMES elements" as shorthand for something
more generic (and pedantic-sounding!) along the lines of:
"Each property must be one of the top-level elements of
'cross-domain' status in the DCMI metadata vocabulary.
At present, the set of all top-level elements of 'cross-domain'
status happens to be co-terminous with DCMES."
However, I see that in
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0201&L=dc-usage&O=A&P=661
Andy does say that "more importantly, the notion of 'Simple DC'
is fixed permanently (because we've said that the DC namespace
is not going to change)." After all the discussion since then,
is Andy and Pete's definition of Simple DC still linked to a
particular (and permanently fixed) namespace prefix? I had
thought we were generally trying to move away from seeing
namespace prefixes as, in effect, packaging mechanisms for
our vocabularies, and to see particular packages like Simple
DC as application profiles, which by definition can draw on
multiple namespaces.
If this is indeed the intent, then I am very happy with Andy
and Pete's definition of 'Simple DC' though perhaps it would
help to add a few extra words, or a footnote, to clarify
whether 'Simple DC' can -- already or in the future -- refer
to more than the fifteen elements. IMHO, it should refer
to the set of top-level elements with cross-domain status.
Projecting from the current rate of expansion, I should think
that this set will be stable enough for practical purposes.
Awhile ago, I considered suggesting we refer to the DCMES
Fifteen as "Dublin Core Classic" (and if unqualified,
"Dublin Core Lite") but quietly dropped the idea... ;-)
Tom
--
Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask]
Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-171-408-5784
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-14-2619
|