Arthur Chapman wrote:
>
...
>
> I am not sure if we may not be going backwards and getting even
> more complicated that we started out being. I do think that a
> hierarchical system is the best way to proceed, however, and it
> does fit in with the other Dublin Core semantics.
...
>
> DOCUMENT
> ==========================================================
>
> Abstract - Could be placed as a subgroup under Article
> --------
An important strand of this thread to date seems to have been
concerned with resolving DC with earlier and more complex (?)
(primarily bibliographic) schemes, especially MARC. See
Roger Clarke's article posted by Warwick Cathro for example.
1. There are other schemes for marking up bibliographic data which
have been in wider and more general use than MARC (ie not
confined to the professional library community) - BibTex is a
very common and flexible example, widely used in the scientific
community, for which large databases have been painstakingly
assembled. EndNote and ProCite are comparable proprietary systems.
I suggest that the resource-types available in BibTex, etc,
should therefore also be considered as prototypes which have
been exercised a lot, and thus probably work well.
2. Whatever scheme and encoding method(s) we end up with, ensuring
straightforward translation to and from these schemes should be
a priority. I believe that translation should be able to be
handled using eg. XML and DSSSL (?).
Is anyone aware of research or tools along these lines, yet?
--
__________________________________________________
Dr Simon Cox - Australian Geodynamics Cooperative Research Centre
CSIRO Exploration & Mining, PO Box 437, Nedlands, WA 6009 Australia
T: +61 8 9389 8421 F: +61 8 9389 1906 [log in to unmask]
http://www.ned.dem.csiro.au/CoxSimon/
|