Congratulations on this document. I found the recommendation clear and
well organised. I haven't used DC on a regular basis for a couple of
years now and am not a 'techie' -- but some comments for what they're
worth:
1) The use of link AND meta tags depending on the nature of the value
was a surprise at first for someone used to the old recommendation, but
I can follow the logic of why.
2) The non-support of vocabulary encoding schemes seems to me likely to
have the biggest impact. My understanding from the document is that if I
wanted to make a subject statement using (say) a Library of Congress
Subject Heading (LCSH), I can only declare it as coming from the LCSH
vocabulary if the heading itself has a URI, something like,
<link rel="DCTERMS.subject" href="http://loc.org/lcsh/archives"
title="Archives" />
But as far as I know, LCSH does not have URIs for headings, so all I can
do is enter the subject as a literal value surrogate, and so no-one will
know I've drawn it from LCSH. Or am I missing something?
3) The meta data vs metadata thing confused me too but I assumed it was
due to the terminology of the W3C spec.
4) A complete example of a complete 'real-life' DC record in new and old
formats would help non-techies get their heads around the changes
5) A really minor point: I was confused at first about the captions for
the examples until I realised each caption was underneath the example,
not above it, which is what I was expecting.
Regards
Irvin Flack
Metadata Librarian
Centre for Learning Innovation
Email: [log in to unmask]
www.cli.nsw.edu.au
NSW Department of Education and Training
**********************************************************************
This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain
privileged information or confidential information or both. If you
are not the intended recipient please delete it and notify the sender.
**********************************************************************
|