Hi
On Fri 27-Sep-2002 at 02:21:47 +0100, Andy Powell wrote:
>
> http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/dcq-html/
>
> I welcome your comments on this document.
Would is be worth adding an explaination why this:
<meta
name="DCTERMS.dateAquired"
content="2001-07-18"
/>
Should be written like this:
<meta
name="DC.date.dateAquired"
content="2001-07-18"
/>
I realise that people who are used to doing HTML DC wouldn't dream of
doing it using the dcterms namespace however people who first learn
about encoding DC in XML and RDF might assume that the logical way
doing things in XHTML is as the first example above.
Also is there a use for the dctype namespace?
<link
rel="schema.DCTYPE"
href="http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/"
/>
<meta
name="DCTYPE"
content="Text"
/>
If the above is not a good idea for backwards compatability then perhaps
is should be made clear that it should be done like this:
<meta
name="DC.type"
scheme="DCMIType"
content="Text"
/>
Chris
--
Chris Croome <[log in to unmask]>
web design http://www.webarchitects.co.uk/
web content management http://mkdoc.com/
everything else http://chris.croome.net/
|