On Wed, 29 Oct 1997, Stu wrote:
> I like Simon's application of structure to the elements... it does make
> more pedagoical sense, and making the DC easier to teach is an
> enormously important issue.
I've got a bad feeling about where this is headed. Who's to say that
there aren't other equally valid orderings as Simon's (like most familiar
-> least understood or most generic -> most specific ... ) that one could
impose on these elements.
This RFC doesn't exist primarily as an all-purpose teaching tool (unless
its to be a user guide as well as a ref spec), but an informational
reference specification--a semantic stake in the ground in the absence of
an Internet Standards Track ID or RFC.
That doesn't mean that it should be silent on or defeat facilitating
teaching and learning, but should try to focus on the business of
describing the semantics of the core element set well without
distractions.
<Editorial:Shameless>
Making internet standards accessible to users and developers is the job of
the nutshell folks at ora.com and those who would pretend to do as good a
job of it as them, not standardization efforts.
</>
I'd stick to Dirk's principle of unorderedness and leave it at that.
-marc
> I'd be in favor of adding Dirk's explicit
> statement about order NOT being significant, and reordering the elements
> such that they fall into Simon's categories and describing the rationale
> for the groupings as well.
>
> stu
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 29, 1997 11:48 AM, John A. Kunze
> [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] wrote:
> > I've taken the liberty of changing the Subject line to what _I_ think
> > Simon Cox meant by "element order". Simon, correct me if I
> misunderstand,
> > but I believe you are _not_ suggesting we require a certain ordering
> of
> > elements in a set of metadata (eg, embedded in an HTML doc).
> >
> > Instead, I believe you're suggesting that the draft RFC _explain_ the
> > elements in a different sequence than that listed on the T-shirt.
> > (I agree that the T-shirt sequence makes little pedagogical sense.)
> >
> > -John
> > =========================
> > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 10:40:49 -0500
> > From: Simon Cox <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: DC-list <[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: RE: new draft of DC basic elements
> >
> > The draft RFC on DC basic elements quite understandably
> > presents the elements in the now "classic" order which
> > developed from the original proposals for the Dublin Core.
> > However, there does not appear to be a clear consistent
> > logic to the sequence
> > (Title, Creator, Subject, Description, Publisher,
> > Contributor, Date, Type, Format, Identifier, Source,
> > Language, Relation, Coverage, Rights).
> > I wonder if this very public roll-out would be
> > an opportune time to improve on this?
> >
> > There are many ways to do this, of course.
> > A simple way would be alphabetical.
> >
> > Better, perhaps, would be something reflecting functional
> > behaviour, which might assist newcomers in coming to grips
> > with the set. The latter is the main motivation in fiddling
> > with the T-shirt rule in this way.
> >
> > I've commented elsewhere (to the datamodel working group)
> > that there is some ambiguity in the element semantics
> > under some circumstances, which effectively makes a
> > unique functional grouping impossible.
> > However, I suggest that something like the following
> > sequence (and sub-headings?) makes some sense:
> >
> > Elements related mainly to the CONTENT of the resource
> > Title
> > Subject
> > Description
> > Language
> > Coverage
> >
> > Elements related mainly to INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY of the resource
> > Creator
> > Contributors
> > Publisher
> > Rights
> > Source
> > Relation
> >
> > Elements related mainly to the INSTANTIATION of the resource
> > Identifier
> > Format
> > Type
> > Date
> > --
> > __________________________________________________
> > 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/SimonCox/
> >
> >
>
>
|