Relation_Type Working Group
Background
The Helsinki meeting of the Dublin Core working group agreed that there was
a one to one relation between a metadata set and an information resource.
Thus, if the metadata we are creating describes a digital object whose
source was a photograph which in turn has as its source an original
manuscript, there will be three metadata sets (each consisting of as many
as all fifteen repeatable Dublin Core elements). Obviously we need to
define the nature of the relation between these metadata sets (sometimes
these will be in the same "record" and other times they will have been
created by different people at different times).
Initial work on defining a scheme of values for Relation.Type took place in
Helsinki. A group of about half the participants (30) met for an hour to
define such types and enumerated many relationships with they initially
clustered into five categories of relations. It defined these as creative,
mechanical, versions, inclusion and reference, but acknowledged that this
was a very preliminary scheme.
In informal discussions immediately following the meeting, a slightly more
complete model emerged when more examples were introduced:
Historical
Creative (such as translations, performances)
Mechanical (such as reproductions, format transformations, copies, mirrors)
Versions (such as published editions, drafts, plans, print states)
Part/Whole
Inclusions (such as physical collections, items, parts)
References
Citations (such bibliographic citations, acknowledgements)
Dependency
Physical (Software or hardware dependency)
Ideotypical (speciment to Type-specimen, work to iconographic type)
No one expects to develop a typology the will be fixed (all discussion was
in terms of an extensible list), but the need for a reasonable complete
typology is pressing for implementers. A working group was established, of
which I have agreed to serve as the chair, to develop such a list ASAP.
This note is a call to all those who wish to contribute grist to that
discussion to offer examples of relationships which you feel must be
accommodated. We have found that examples are very helpful in describing
the relationships since we come from quite different communities. This call
will be open until November 15.
In addition, this is a call to those who want to join the working group.
Members of the working group will be asked to consider drafts of the rules
by which we would recognize relation types. Sprcifically, after November
15, I would like those who have volunteered to serve on the working group
to critique a proposed high level structure based on principles we have
developed for how to recognize discrete relation types.
We will aim to report formally in time for inclusion in the report of the
Helsinki conference, which is expected to be submitted in final form before
the end of December.
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
|