The notion that there should be a difference between metadata that is
embedded versus metadata that is held in a seperate database raises serious
problems.
To tie the interpretation of metadata to whether it is embedded or exists
somewhere 'out there' is a serious mistake that would cripple the potential
usefulness of the metadata. Interpretation of some aspects of the metadata
would be dependent upon the context, which means it could not be reliably
separated from the resource it describes.
If Camp 1 is about those who would restrict their deployment of metadata to
embedded metadata, and will never extract such data into a seperate
database, and expect no one else to harvest such metadata as surrogates,
then I think it will be a small camp with limited prospects for
interoperability.
I do not believe that is what Ricky was describing but I hope she will
respond with a clarification.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Andresen [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Friday, December 04, 1998 2:47 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Camp 1 / Camp 2 and 1:1
>
> To DC-general list
>
> In Ricky Erways post-DC6 suggestion was described two main camps in
> DC discussions:
>
> camp1) metadata for discovery of web resources
>
> camp2) metadata as basis for inhouse database systems for everything
>
> It is important to remember this two different views.
>
>
> There are lots of questions that are of great interest for the building up
> of a
> database, but which are quite irrelevant for metadata embedded in the
> described resource itself.
>
> This particularly applies to the discussion about the 1:1 principle which
> featured high on the agenda in Helsinki on DC5 and was also touched
> upon on DC6. When David Bearman suggests that apart from RFC 2413
> there was also agreement on the 1:1 principle, it poses two important
> questions:
>
> The 1:1 principle is of no relevance to camp 1! When metadata are
> embedded in the resource which is being described, then the entire -
> possibly complex - information in the resource must be expressed with
> these metadata. You cannot create separate metadata registration for e.g.
> a reproduced painting: there are no separate metadata for anything.
>
> Which issues do in fact require special rules? In the case of inhouse
> databases it does not really make much sense to work out sets of rules
> like
> e.g. the 1:1 principle. It will always have to be a concrete estimate of
> how
> a collection of data can be disseminated in the best possible way and
> never a theoretical consideration of how it should ideally happen. An
> issue
> like the 1:1 principle, therefore, belongs to discussions on best
> practice
> i.e. as a subject at workshops for implementors but not as a
> standardized
> rule.
>
> Regards
>
> Leif
>
>
> ********************************************************
> Leif Andresen * Email: [log in to unmask]
> Library Advisory Officer
> Danish National Library Authority
> Nyhavn 31 E, DK-1051 Copenhagen K
> Phone direct: +45 3373 3354
> Phone: +45 3373 3373 * Telefax: +45 3373 3372
> ********************************************************
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|