Hi all,
I just updated the wiki page with the results of a brainstroming session
in Dagstuhl[1] last week:
http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/DCAM_Revision_Tech
I merged in the contents of DC-RDF to see if we hit on any conflicts. So
far it seems to work. The document is a little messy, sorry for that. I
hope I find the time to clean it up and of course work further on it
this week.
Main change: The graph container is now the description set,
descriptions would not be a class in RDF, they are only implicitely
defined based on the notion of statements with the same subject.
Interesting question: What happens to the record? Again this seems to be
a question that relates to similar questions in the RDF community: How
to distinguish the content from the serialization. It would be
interesting to keep it somehow, but maybe it will belong rather to
best-practice than to DCAM.
On a side note, I would like to mention that we started in Dagstuhl with
a mapping between DC-Terms and the upcoming PROV ontology [2]. This will
be discussed on the DCPROV mailinglist and is a joint effort between the
DCMI Metadata Provenance TG and the W3C Provenance Working Group.
Cheers,
Kai
[1] http://www.dagstuhl.de/no_cache/en/program/calendar/semhp/?semnr=12091
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDCMapping
--
Kai Eckert
Universitätsbibliothek Mannheim
Stellv. Leiter Abteilung Digitale Bibliotheksdienste
Schloss Schneckenhof West / 68131 Mannheim
Tel. 0621/181-2946 Fax 0621/181-2918
|