> From: Terry Allen <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1996
> | this way. Leaving the name as Identifier for now, imagine the provider
> | at the controls of a metadata-aware record input form:
> |
> | ELEMENT INSTRUCTIONS
> | Author: _________________ names go here, family name first
> | Identifier: _____________ identifiers go here (for the resource)
> | Relation: _______________ identifiers go here too (a related resource)
> | Description: ____________ identifiers or words go here
> | ...
>
> I first wrote: ... > And then looked again.... > and this does seem odd.
Yes, the original DC spec (if one can call it that) for Relation looks
confusing on close inspection. (This was not an uncommon sensation for
the User Guide group as we worked our way through the DC elements.)
The example simply illustrates that identifiers, whether they go in
the element content or in a qualifier, are important components of at
least several elements.
Therefore the label "Identifier" doesn't capture anything unique about
the element. As a lable, "Resource" isn't perfect, but it works better.
-John
|