On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Roland Schwaenzl wrote:
> there is a dc-agents working group.
> Do we discuss a proposal which reflects
> consensus of that group or do we just
> informally exchange our views on dc:CCP
> and other approaches to agentRoles?
I assume that we discuss it here as the DC-Architecture group.
> subProperty relations between CCP itself
> have been discussed at the Tokio meeting
> a year ago in a face to face meeting.
>
> I left that meeting with the impression
> there will be further discussion in
> dc:agents on the case.
>
> Anything known about?
I'm not sure...
> The dc:publisher role is not subordinated to
> dc:contributor
In Tokyo we discussed whether both dc:publisher and dc:creator where
element refinements of dc:contributor. In fact, it might well have been
me that suggested it.
You'll note that this time round I only suggested that dc:creator was an
element refinement of dc:contributor.
Given the current definition of dc:publisher I do not think that we can
treat dc:publisher as an element refinement of dc:contributor. As you
indicate below, both dc:creator and dc:contributor have some input into
the content of a resource. dc:publisher simply has to do with making the
resource available.
> When one wants a terminal to a class of
> agentRoles one openly should call
> such a terminal property something like
> "agent" (as a short for "hasAsAgent" as "creator"
> is a short for "hasAsCreator"),
IMHO, the English word 'agent' works very badly as the name of a property
- much worse than the word 'creator'.
> but i'm NOT in favour to shoe-horne all such
> roles in dc:contributor.
If you accept that dc:creator is a sub-property of dc:contributor then all
creator and contributor element refinements ultimately fall under
contributor.
I agree that dc:publisher and its element refinements should not be
treated in this way.
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/
|