AGENDA FOR USAGE BOARD CALL
Version: 2005-02-24, 15:43 UTC
Date and time of conference:
Friday, 25 February, at 2100UTC
UTC 2100
Bath 2100
Berlin 2200
Tokyo 0600
Canberra 0700
Seattle 1300
Ithaca 1600
Calling into the conference:
1) Dial the local number for your country as listed at
http://www.sprintbiz.com/intlaudio. For example, in
Germany one dials 0800-181-2311. This apparently gets
you to the US phone system.
2) When prompted to type the "ten-digit number", type
888-448-7101. This apparently gets you to the Sprint
conferencing facility in the US.
3) When prompted to type the participant number, type
"7646081"
Expected participants:
Andy
Tom
Akira
Stuart
Diane
Rebecca
May not attend:
Traugott
Andrew
Agenda
1) Review of Meeting Notes, temporarily posted at
http://www.bi.fhg.de/People/Thomas.Baker/Meeting-notes.txt.
We should walk through these, review actions, get updates,
set priorities, and generally map out what needs to be done
before the May meeting.
2) Accessibility - Discuss so we can wrap this up. See threads
starting on Feb 4, http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind05028&L=dc-usage&T=0&O=A&P=54
3) NLM proposal from Rebecca. Process-wise, I think we would vote
on this over the list, but we should discuss it here, in case there
are any problems. See http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0501&L=dc-usage&T=0&O=A&P=978
4) AOB
----
Title: Meeting notes for DCMI Usage Board meeting,
9-10 October 2004, at Shanghai Library
Date: 2004-10-19
Note: This document is a running account of decisions
taken in the Usage Board meeting in Shanghai.
It was created by Andy Powell with minor
corrections and additions by Tom Baker. It is
intended for internal use by the Usage Board
in finalizing its decisions. A more readable,
contextualized summary of the meeting will
be prepared for dissemination to the general
public. After posting on the DC-USAGE-BC list
on 2004-10-19, this document will be considered
frozen.
DC Usage Board Meeting
Shanghai
Day 1 - 9 October 2004
Present: Tom Baker, Eva Mendez (guest), Diane Hillman, Andrew
Wilson, Rebecca Guenther, Pete Johnston (guest), Andy Powell,
Stuart Sutton, Traugott Koch, Akira Miyazawa (joined at 15.00
on first day)
Revisions to DCMI Process Document
* Add wording to the UB Process document referring to
the DCMI Mission Statement, e.g. to section 4.3 onwards --
Action: Stuart.
* Add wording to 4.3.1 of UB Process document to indicate
that the criteria are not 'exclusive' -- Action: Stuart.
* Create statement of what the boundaries are for
inclusion of terms in DCMI (i.e. what 'resource discovery'
and 'cross-domain' means in practice) and include into UB
Mission and Principles or elsewhere -- Action: Andrew.
* Note: we will need to revisit 3.2 of UB Process
document at some stage in light of statement above.
* Add wording somewhere in UB Process document to
indicate that the recording of decisions should be rich
enough that the rationale for decisions is clear to others --
Action: Stuart.
* Agreed various changes to the UB Process document
based on the email from Tom in the meeting packet (Stuart
has detailed record of changes required) -- Action: Stuart
* Agreed that the announcement of the start of the
comment period should come from the shepherd and should say
that comments can go to either the appropriate WG mailing
list, the dc-general mailing list or privately to the shepherd
and should explicitly ask for indications of support for the
proposal. Need to update the UB Process document accordingly
-- Action: Stuart
* Agreed to create a comment period announcement email
template to be used by shepherds -- Action: Tom
Status of Proposals to the Usage Board
* Need to clarify the relationship between
UB Process document and Makx's 'Procedure for
approval of DCMI Metadata Terms and Recommendations'
http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/approval/ - Action: Tom
* Proposals for new terms should be moved to the DCMI Web
site, and given DCMI page headers and a status of 'Proposed
term'. when they are accepted by the UB (i.e. before comment
period starts). UB Process document needs to be updated to
say this. -- Action: Stuart
Abstract Model
* For each of the currently recommended encoding schemes
we need to determine if it is a syntax encoding scheme or
a vocabulary encoding scheme. Tom to share previous notes
on this. Andy to prepare list of suggestions -- Action: Andy
* Agreed to consider re-wording the definitions
of current elements to make them more consistent with the
abstract model. Need to draft some proposed changes initially.
Action: Andy
DCSV
* Previous action to revise DCSV-related encoding
schemes carried forward -- Action: Andy and Andrew
(Akira joined the meeting at this point.)
Versioning of DCMI 'term descriptions'
* Agreed to continue the current practice of treating
the DCMI description of a DCMI term as a discrete 'bundle of
metadata' that is assigned a new URI each time the 'bundle'
is updated.
Attributes for describing DCMI Terms ("UB application profile")
* Agreed that we need to
o EITHER re-use existing OWL/RDFS terms and create new
UB- specific terms (in UB namespaces - 'UB terms', 'UB term
types', 'UB encoding scheme types' and 'UB status types')
to describe all DCMI terms
o OR liaise with ISO11179 about re-using their terms
(which requires them assigning URIRefs for those terms and
have an underlying RDF model).
* Need to talk to Harry in first instance about
possibilities for second option -- Action: Tom and Rebecca
MARC Relator Terms
* Agreed to slightly revise those definitions that do
not specifically refer to the resource being described --
Action: Diane
* Agreed to reject 'MARCRel:bibliographic
antecedent', and 'MARCRel:sponsor'. Also agreed to make
'MARCRel:Contributor' and 'MARCRel:publisher' sub-properties
of dc:contributor and dc:publisher respectively. Need to
produce revised list -- Action: Rebecca
* DCMI needs an RDF-based mechanism for recording UB's
endorsment of each LoC assertion that MARCRel:xxx refines
dc:xxx or dcterms:xxx -- Action: Pete
* Need to update the UB Process document to include a
new status of 'Endorsed' and document related processes --
Action: Stuart
* Need to consider future possibilities for giving a
status of 'Conforming' to terms in external namespaces.
* Need to supply examples for Using Dublin Core --
Action: Pete
* Need to document ongoing relationship between DCMI
and LoC (see action 4 on page 93 of meeting pack) -- Action:
Tom, Rebecca
End of day 1
DC Usage Board Meeting
Shanghai
Day 2 - 10 October 2004
Present: Tom Baker, Eva Mendez (guest), Diane Hillman, Andrew
Wilson, Rebecca Guenther, Pete Johnston (guest), Andy Powell,
Stuart Sutton, Traugott Koch, Akira Miyazawa, Liddy Nevile
(guest), Charles McCathie-Nevile (guest), Juha Hakala (guest),
Jeni Stenval (guest), Dan Brickley (guest), Raju Buddharaju
(guest).
Element Refinement document
* Agreed to publish Pete's document as a 'recommended
resource'. Supply copy of document to Makx -- Action: Pete
Element proposal: Accessibility
* Agreed to change definition to: A description of the
qualities of the resource in terms of control, display and
content that can be used to match the needs and preferences
of a user.
* Vote (as Recommended): For -- 8, Against -- 0,
Abstain - 0
* Note: need to clarify comment to indicate what is meant
by 'control, display and content' and to note that recommended
best practice is to provide a machine-readable statement --
Action: Stuart
(Liddy left at this point -- Dan B joined)
Term proposals: Collection Description
* accrualMethod -- Vote (as Conforming): For - 7,
Against - 0 Abstain - 1. Change 'method' to 'process' in the
definition. Remove mention of specific scheme from comment.
* accrualPeriodicity -- Vote (as Conforming): For - 7,
Against - 0, Abstain -- 1. Remove mention of specific scheme
from comment.
* accrualPolicy -- Vote (as Conforming): For - 7,
Against - 0, Abstain -- 1. Remove mention of specific scheme
from comment.
* Unable to approve or reject proposals for 3 DC-CD
controlled vocabularies. Defer decision, pending clarification
about the ongoing maintenance of the vocabularies. Suggest
that WG consider possible options for future maintenance.
Seek clarification from the Board of Trustees about the role
of DCMI (and the DC UB) in the maintenance of controlled
vocabularies -- Action: Tom
Term proposal: Education
* Change definition to: 'A process, used to engender
knowledge, attitudes and skills, that the resource is designed
to support'.
* Need to find a way of removing 'this element describes'
from the start of the comment -- Action: Stuart
* Decision text needs to document community support.
* Vote (as Conforming): for -- 8, against -- 0 abstain --
0 Encoding scheme approval
* Agreed we will, in principle, accept a proposal for
'NLM' as a vocabulary encoding scheme with a DCTERMS URI
* Need to prepare proposal and discuss with NLM --
Action: Rebecca
* Expectation that this will be the last proposal to
assign a DCMI URI to an external vocabulary. Need to develop
a policy, process, mechanism and documentation for endorsing
non-DCMI encoding scheme URIs (same endorsement mechanism as
for endorsing non-DCMI properties) and develop guidelines to
help external organisations/people declare URIs for non-DCMI
vocabulary encoding schemes (to note that preference is
for owners to declare URIs for their own vocabularies).
Note impact on status of 'Registered' in current UB Process
document -- Action: Stuart, Diane, Tom (Pete for RDF mechanism)
* Need a public statement of new approach for handling
vocabulary encoding schemes -- Action: Tom
* Need to flag existing encoding scheme documentation
on the DCMI Web site (and the registration tool) as being
obsolete -- Action: Tom
ISO 8601
* Agreed to register a new syntax encoding scheme called
'dcterms:ISO8601Basic' and add comment indicating that some
value strings that conform to ISO8601Basic will not be valid
value strings for dc:date (e.g. '15.30').
* Need to reformulate the decision text -- Action:
Rebecca
Type vocabulary definitions and comments
* Need to tidy up editorial inconsistencies and send
to dc-usage list for signing off -- Action: Stuart
Definition of dc:date
* Proposed re-definition: 'A date (or date and time),
including a range, of an event in the lifecycle of the
resource'. Suggest this to the DC Date WG as a new definition
of dc:date and ask for their comments -- Action: Rebecca.
* Need a new process for handling changes to definitions
like this -- Action: Diane and Stuart.
* Explain implications for ISO and NISO of changes to
dc:date definition -- Action: Rebecca
Review of application profiles
* Need to ask the Board of Trustees to clarify the
commitment and mechanism that DCMI has for maintaining the
application profiles that are developed by DC WGs.
Preservation policy for DCMI documentation
* Agreed that the PDF version of the meeting packet is
sufficient for preservation purposes.
DCX Proposal
* DCMI does not host experimental or short term
namespaces. Discuss response to requester with Makx --
Action: Juha (as visitor)
What is Simple Dublin Core?
* Some discussion about what 'simple DC' means but no
real concensus reached. AskDCMI and FAQ
* Some discussion about 'issues' and updates to the
AskDCMI system, but no decisions made due to lack of time.
End of day 2
Notes taken by Andy Powell
--
Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask]
Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-160-9664-2129
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-144-2352
Personal email: [log in to unmask]
--
Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask]
Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-160-9664-2129
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-144-2352
Personal email: [log in to unmask]
|
