I note Misha's concerns about the implementation problems caused by our
use of separate DC and DCTERMS namespaces.
The draft revision to the namespace policy explicitly says
Term URIs are grouped into DCMI namespaces in order to ease the
assignment of URIs to terms and to streamline their use in particular
encoding syntaxes
yet we quite clearly haven't done this in the case of the DC and DCTERMS
namespaces, where we have kept two namespaces simply for historical
reasons.
Under item 2, I will therefore suggest that we consider replicating all
the current terms in the DC namespace into the DCTERMS namespace (allowing
the use of a single namespace by many DC applications), using RDFS to
explciitly declare equivalences between the old DC terms and the new
DCTERMS terms.
Your thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Andy.
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Andy Powell wrote:
> http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/namespace-policy/
>>>
>>> 2 Discussion about revising the "DCMI Namespace Policy" recommendation
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/
|