Chris Rusbridge writes:
> I have been wanting for some time to promote the use of metadata in the
> scholarly resources that eLib is creating, and particularly the use of the
> Dublin Core in that context.
In many instances (ANR, WoPEc) the metadata is the lion share of
actual data created.
> Some of the instabilities in syntax put me off,
This is the point that is holding me back. I need to have one
recognised syntax. At the moment there are two and Stu seems to
be suggesting that they both may be used. I think they should
bang their heads together until one is dropping out. :-)
> So I personally would like to see many projects taking a good look at Dublin
> Core metadata, and beginning to experiment with including it in their
> resources.
The purpose of DC is somewhat unclear to me, but I think
it is best viewed as a way to embed metadata in an html file, see
http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/TR/WD-htmllink. Clearly at WoPEc the
initial stage is to augement the existing descriptive pages
of papers with DC material. That can be done if we have a
precise syntax and a registry of official qualifiers
is operating. I have been pleading for the latter for a long
time, and contributed to Jon's efforts. I think that they
have later been superseeded (?) by the Canberra qualifiers.
> I know the
> syntax is still a bit rocky, but it seems likely that there is sufficient
> do some basic descriptive work on most pages.
But not yet to keep more complicated metadata for a resource that is
a collection of digital objects. I think the Warwick framework is
supposed to be used for this, but I have not seen an implementation
that would demonstrate to me how it works.
Thomas Krichel mailto:[log in to unmask]
http://gretel.econ.surrey.ac.uk
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|