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 .............
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|