Hi Karen,

Thank you for your feedback.

What I meant with "in the framework of a PhD" was that this method was
the main result of my PhD. And by saying that I meant to say that I
followed a methodological process, roughly saying: state of the art -
design - validation. I wanted to show that the work had some credibility
(as far as a PhD is reliable).

We have done 2 publications to arrive to the final result, but they are
milestones. There is no on-line publication/information yet - we are
working on that!

By method we mean a selection of techniques, the control of their usage
and the integration of the obtained partial results.

The Singapore Framework, the DCMI Guidelines and the Rational Unified
Process (RUP) [1] are the starting points for the design of this method.
Then we integrated (i) the early stages that go until data modelling
from the methods and techniques used by the Software Engineering
Community for software development; (ii) the information that came from
a study on the state of the art of the methodologies for the development
of Dublin Core Application Profiles [2], and; (iii) the results of the
analysis of semi-structured interviews conducted to three DCAP
developers: DRYAD [3], Scholarly Work Application Profile [4] and
Variazioni Musical Application Profile [5].

This method follows the Singapore Stages (SS) activities: Development of
the Functional Requirements, Development of the Domain Model,
Development of the Description Set Profile, Development of the Usage
Guidelines and Development of the Syntax Guidelines. These SS produce,
when completed, the Singapore deliverables: Functional Requirements,
Domain Model, Description Set  Profile, Usage guidelines (optional),
Syntax guidelines(optional)

The method also suggests sometimes which techniques can be used to
develop the activities.

This method defines the path to follow along a DCAP development process,
though the SS activities, establishing:
• which are the activities to develop;
• when these activities should be executed;
• how they are interconnected;

I hope now I have been more clear.

Again, thank you for your help!

Mariana

[1] Kruchten, P. (2004). The rational unified process: an introduction.
Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston, MA, USA, 3 edition.
[2] Curado Malta, M. and Baptista, A. A. (2013d). State of the art on
methodologies for the development of a metadata application profile.
International Journal of Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies, 8(4):332–341.
[3] Carrier, S. (2008). The dryad repository application profile:
Process, development, and refinement. Master’s thesis.
[4] Allinson, J. and Powell, A. (2006). SWAP application profile.
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Eprints_Application_Profile.
Access in 23 Oct 2012.
[5] Iglesias, C. A., Garijo, M., Molina, D., and de Juan, P. (2009).
VMAP. A Dublin Core Application Profile for Musical Resources.
In Fabio Satori, Miguel A. Sicilia, N. M., editor, Metadata and Semantic
Research: Third International Conference, MTSR 2009, number 46 in CCIS,
pages 1–12. MTSR, Springer Verlag.


On 05-10-2014 19:16, Karen Coyle wrote:
> Mariana, can you say a bit more about what it does. I'm not sure what
> "in the framework of a PhD" means, nor what kind of metadata APs are
> developed. That would help in terms of selecting a name. Is there any
> documentation online that we could look at?
>
> kc
>
> On 10/5/14, 8:25 AM, Mariana Curado Malta wrote:
>> Dear community,
>>
>> We have designed a method for the development of metadata application
>> profiles in the framework of a PhD. We intend to publish the method in
>> an international journal but, before we do, we are asking the metadata
>> community for help: we want to find an appealing name for the method.
>>
>> Do you want to help us?
>>
>> Plesae fill the one question survey here:
>> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/5KVYLRV
>>
>> Thank you in advance for your help,
>>
>> Mariana Malta
>>
>