Changing the subject to "Workflow"...
> > I'm not sure it is important as long as the RDF schema points
> > back to the "canonical" representation (assuming for the sake
> > of argument that it is http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/dc/).
>
> ?? Canonical? How you create xml-schema from it?
I think we're talking past each other here... We need to
set up a workflow from a Usage Board decision to recording
that decision to representing that decision in various forms
(text, HTML, RDF, XML schemas...). Where does that workflow
start -- with a text document, a VMS database, an RDF schema,
or what? Speaking practically, I believe the answer has to
be one -- and only one -- of the above. I do not believe it
is practical to ask the Usage Board to review and approve two
representations of the same semantics, and I do not think it
is wise to assume that a human will carefully cross-check all
corrections by hand. There have been various RDF schemas of
DCMI terms over the past three years and at no time have any
of them ever been completely accurate as representations of
the canonical Recommendation documents.
One small example for illustration: I just discovered
a spelling error in the definition of "isReplacedBy"
and have corrected it in the draft documentation (see
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0205&L=dc-usage&O=A&P=3971).
I cannot imagine myself over anyone else taking it upon
themselves to ensure that this change is also made in the RDF
schema. Whether the workflow starts with a flat text file,
a VMS database, or an RDF schema, _somehow_ we must ensure
that this spelling correction, or any other modification,
once made, will be accurately and automatically reflected in
all of the other representations.
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
|