Dear Roland,
You are right that the correct analysis yields Person.Name, Person.Address
etc. I think this conforms to what Misha (and the group which met to
discuss data models in Helsinki) was saying.
In addition, the basic fifteen elements are organized so that Creator,
Contributor, Publisher (all roles of persons or organizations) are primary
elements. The more rigorous model is that there are persons and
organizations, each of which can have names, addresses and roles.
Probably the "resource discoverer" will look for people and or
organizations, and the metadata harvester will have to map Creator,
Contributor, Publisher into people/organization indexes and return Personx
(Creator), Personx (Contributor), Personx (Publisher) anyway.
In the "simple" template of fifteen elements, this confusion does no major
harm, but I imagine more sophisticated interfaces will want to capture the
datatype and the specific role.
David
At 12:22 PM 10/24/97 +0200, schwaenzl wrote:
>
>
>
>
>Dear Meta2,
>
>Misha came up with a problem concerning
>
>DC.Creator.PersonalName.Address
>
>
>He was talking about trouble with the data model. Actually i think it's
not a data model
>problem, but the construct is something plain outside the semantics for TYPE
>sub-elements agreed on at Canberra.
>
>The golden rule was: A(n iterated) TYPE sub-element has to narrow the
semantics of
>the preceding (TYPE qualified) DC element.
>
>This is not with
>
>DC.Creator.PersonalName.Address
>
>There is no useful semantics for ``Address'' to narrow the meaning of
``PersonalName''.
>
>The problem is with the ``PersonalName'' qualifier.
>
>''PersonalName'' as primary TYPE qualifier for DC.Creator should become
substituted
>with the composite ``Person.Name''
>---------------------------------------------
>
>There is -- in my view --some more trouble with the ``Proposed Dublin Core
>Qualifiers/Subelements'' document at
>
>http://www.loc.gov/marc/dcqualif.html
>
>It is stated there (still with DC.Creator):
>
>``Note that qualifiers listed in the Knight/Hamilton document extend the
element rather
>than refine it (e.g. postal,phone,fax, affiliation, etc.). ....''
>
>This doesn't seem to me as correct.
>
>The element description reads:
>
>``Label: creator
>
>The person or organisation primarily responsible for .....``
>
>As one never can put a ``person or organisation'' into a file, one has to
interprete
>the sentence to give it a meaning.
>
>One interpretation is to say: ``Information about'' the person or
organisation......
>
>With this interpretation
>
>DC.Creator.Person (CONTENT=human, age 27)
>
>is a valid record....and DC.Creator.Person.Postal (CONTENT=85 Fleet
Street) is valid too
>with an obvious meaning also.
>
>There would be no extension of the semantics of DC.Creator in either case.
>
>
>Best
>
>Roland
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
David Bearman, President
Archives & Museum Informatics
5501 Walnut St., Suite 203
Pittsburgh, PA 15232 USA
ph. + 1-412-683-9775
fax + 1-412-683-7366
email: [log in to unmask]
URL: www.archimuse.com
|