Hi Adil,
Yes there are disadvantages with our approach. For example the prefixes used inside xsi:type don't need to be declared for the XML document to be valid, however they do need to be declared to validate the document, so if you loose this linkage somehow you can end up in a unpleasant situation.
Also, there are various other issues you can come across by Googling about using xsi:type
-----Original Message-----
From: Adil Hasan [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 27 December 2012 11:46
To: Retter, Adam
Cc: [log in to unmask]; Walpole, Rob; Davey, Jaishree
Subject: Re: dublin Core Description Set question
Hello Adam,
thanks for your response!
I can see your point. I was thinking about such an approach, but was worried about it's conformance with DC (but I think that it meets the requirements). To me I think your approach is pragmatic and makes sense.
Do you have any problems with your approach?
I looked a little longer at the description set document that I found and I think that I need to have the element ResourceURI which has value myURI adn then statements firstName, lastName etc:
<dcds:description>
<dcds:resourceURI>
myURI
</dcds:resourceURI>
<dcds:statement>
firstname
</dcds:statement>
<dcds:statement>
lastname
</dcds:statement>
</dcds:description>
But, I agree it does seem to look a little like RDF (although I don't know it so well) and to make a schema out of it maybe is a little tricky.
I would like to be able to store the attributes in a database. To me I think your approach really makes sense.
hope that your New Year will be a very good one for you, adil
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 10:59:41AM +0000, Retter, Adam wrote:
> Hi Adil,
>
> We found that the XML expression of Dublin Core was difficult/cumbersome to extend, we will be looking at RDF in future to replace that, but its some way off yet for our system.
>
> In the mean-time we have taken a pragmatic approach which comes with pro's and con's, basically we use the xsi:type attribute on various Dublin Core elements to allow us to control their content, e.g.
>
> <dctems:contributor xsi:type="tnam:person">
> <tnam:person>
> <tnamp:name>
> <tnamp:firstName>John</tnamp:firstName>
> <tnamp:lastName>Smith</tnamp:lastName>
> </tnamp:name>
> </tanm:person>
> </dcterms:contributor>
>
> There are several reasons why using xsi:type is not always a good idea, a quick Google will inform you about these, however for us it has some advantages in this instance:
> 1) it allows us to validate all of our type data in one XML Schema
> validation step
> 2) its human understandable
> 3) if we assume the lowest-common denominator is, processing and
> parsing it as text, then it is still understandable
>
>
> I am not promoting this approach, rather just reporting on one that can be useful in some circumstances.
>
> I would be very interested to hear comments on this from other DC-GENERAL list members...
>
> Thanks Adam.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: General DCMI discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Adil Hasan
> Sent: 23 December 2012 23:35
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: dublin Core Description Set question
>
> Hello,
> I have a question regarding the description set. If I wish to, for example refine the dcterms:contributor element in XML so that I can have a firstName and secondName.
>
> I see the recommendation is to make use of the dc description set. What I am puzzling over is how to link the contributor to the description set. I assume that I need have an id that is the URI for the description set?
>
> I think I am not explaining myself well. Do I do something like:
>
> <dcterms:contributor>
> myURI
> </dcterms:contributor>
>
> <dcds:descriptionSet
> xmlns:dcds="http://purl.org/dc/xmlns/2008/09/01/dc-ds-xml/">
> <dcds:description>
> <dcds:statement dcds:propertyURI="http://purl.org/dc/terms/contributor">
> <dcds:literalValueString>
> myURI
> </dcds:literalValueString>
> </dcds:statement>
> </dcds:description>
> <dcds:description>
> <dcds:statement
> dcds:propertyURI="http://purl.org/dc/terms/contributor">
> afirstname
> </dcds:statement>
> </dcds:description>
> ...
> </dcds:descriptionSet>
>
> Is that the way it should be done? I would be grateful for any pointers.
>
> Hope that you have a good holiday and hope that the new year will be a good one for you.
>
> adil
>
> Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
>
>
> National Archives Disclaimer
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email.
> Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
>
Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Archives Disclaimer
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email.
Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|