Cliff:
Watch the use of "GEM." I may claim it.
(smile)
Gary E. Masters
At 08:55 AM 5/11/99 +0100, you wrote:
>I'm concerned about this whole business of "guerrilla DC". I don't know how
>enforceable this whole thing is, but it seems to me to be unacceptable to
>have specialist groups unilaterally appropriating the DC prefix. (Although
>I guess you could argue that "DC-CHEM" is a completely separate namespace
>from "DC" [or "dc"] and that it doesn't imply official DC endorsement.)
>It seems to me to be legitimate to use a DC prefix only when one is
>proposing a local subelement to an already-established DC element, e.g.
>DC.Title.Alternative or DC.Date.Modified. If one wants to use a local
>extension that doesn't seem to fall within the DC set, the namespace
>identifier (for want of a better term) should not be blessed with DC - for
>example, GEM.cataloging, GEM.grade, GEM.audience, IMS.Concepts,
>IMS.Granularity. (You could of course also argue that all of these could be
>dealt with as subelements to a DC element, falling back on DC.Description
>if nothing else, but this isn't what GEM and IMS have done.)
>
>In what way is DC-CHEM a Dublin Core set? Most of the fields seem to fall
>within DC.Subject subelement extensions.
>
>We can't have everyone claiming every metadata set to be DC - it makes a
>nonsense of its "coreness".
>
>If DC (or dc) becomes a registered namespace, does that mean we can have
>some say in who else uses DC in any sort of prefix, or is this tilting at
>windmills?
>
>Cliff Morgan
>Publishing Technologies Director
>John Wiley & Sons Ltd
>Chichester, UK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"R. Wendler" <[log in to unmask]> on 10/05/99 21:18:10
>
>Please respond to [log in to unmask]
>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>cc: (bcc: Cliff Morgan/Chichester/Wiley)
>Subject: Re: DC-Chem
>
>
>
>
>Is there any movement toward registering these topical DC "expansion
>packs" someplace central to reduce redundant wheel design? The
>projecy registry on the DC home page is a nod in that direction, but
>doesn't quite get it. (Yeah, I know this isn't a new topic... I've
>just lost track of it.)
>
>Thanks,
>--Robin
>
>On Mon, 10 May 1999, Frank A. Roos wrote:
>
>> FYI.
>>
>> I came across these slides on the
>> Web:http://krypton.ch.ic.ac.uk/alan/work.html and
>> http://krypton.ch.ic.ac.uk/alan/work1.html
>>
>> The use of DC is analysed against using DC-Chem (not surprisingly a
>> proposed chemical extension to the DC) against not using any metadata
>> and against using both metadata sets.
>>
>> This work has apparently been done by the Dept. of Chemistry at the
>> Imperial College in London.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Frank A. Roos
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Robin Wendler ........................ work (617) 495-3724
>Office for Information Systems ....... fax (617) 495-0491
>Harvard University Library ........... [log in to unmask]
>Cambridge, MA, USA 02138 .............
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Gary E. Masters
Automated Services Librarian
Texas A&M International University
(956) 326-2137 (voice)
(956) 326-2399 (fax)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|