Simon Buckingham Shum wrote:
> Thanks for the replies to my initial query. My model of what my proposed
> scheme requires is a way to define explicit node and link semantics (I come
> from a hypertext background).
Sounds like a job for... (da da da!) the Resource Description Framework,
part of the metadata activities of the World Wide Web consortium that
will provide 'Warwick Framework' type capabilities for encoding more
complex metadata. According to my admittedly limited understanding, RDF
is an application of XML, and describes elements of information and the
relationships between them in terms of 'nodes' and 'arcs'. See
http://www.w3.org/Metadata/RDF/ for more info, or alternatively ask some
of the RDF gurus on this list.
> I'm not clear if schemes like DC (or any others) take into account this
> possibility... They seem to assume that there's only one instantiation of
> each element per document, which is too coarse a granularity.
No; all Dublin Core elements are optional and repeatable. You can have
as few or as many as you like.
> In other words, a set of node-link-node relationships like the above would
> form a (potentially visualizable) concept map for that document. What I
> need is an encoding scheme that would allow such a map to be published and
> searchable on a distributed network.
You might want to consider joining the Dublin Core Relation working
group, which is seeking to identify and classify all of the different
types of relationships that might exist between resources. Contact David
Bearman, email: [log in to unmask]
T.
-- Tony Gill ---------------------- Programme Leader: ADAM & VADS --
Surrey Institute of Art & Design * Farnham * Surrey * GU9 7DS * UK
Tel: +44 (0)1252 722441 x2427 * Fax: +44 (0)1252 712925
-- [log in to unmask] -- http://adam.ac.uk -- http://vads.ahds.ac.uk/ --
|