To summarise....
Sarah noted that the IMLS Collection Registry project is using the URL
of a digital collection as the value of the dc:identifier property,
rather than as the value of the cld:hasLocation property (or some other
subproperty of relation). Theo noted the use of this convention in TEL,
and also emphasised TEL's use of encoding schemes to identify the
protocol supported by that service (Z3950, SRU, SRW, OAI-PMH etc).
Ann and I drew a distinction between collections and services. Ann
suggested that because of the one-to-many relation between collections
and services it would be preferable/necessary to record the URL of the
service as the value of an attribute like hasLocation or, say,
hasService (subproperties of dc:relation) and to describe the attributes
of services in separate metadata records.
Any other opinions on these points please?
Pete
|