Hello Stuart,
It is interesting to look at where we have come from in DC-based metadata
element sets. EdNA (education sector) has not qualified and added an
element - EDNA.userLevel. AGLS (Australian Government Locater Service)
(Government sector) has qualified considerably yet still added the element
AGLS.audience. Hmm ... !
>From where I sit, in Education Queensland we are required to comply with
AGLS for Queensland Government and EdNA for education. It really gets
tricky, and that doesn't include our own early metadata set which requires
reworking to fit the current requirements.
I am a newby to this debate and extremely interested in comments.
Thanks
Myrl
-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Sutton [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, 7 December 1999 12:24
To: 'ALLISON, Myrl'; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Audience category
Myrl & Liddy, I am enjoy this conversation very much because it
so clearly exemplifies the various paths DC-based education
projects pursued in the "early days" of DC. Where does critical
information for discovery (or evaluation in terms of whether to
retrieve) in this domain "belong"? Those that followed an
unqualified approach to DC created many "elements" that in
today's conversation might join the ranks of qualifiers of the
original 15. Other projects qualified away (e.g., my own--GEM)
in order to keep the element set as small as possible and yet
expressive of user needs to discover and use. Hmm .....
Stuart
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Stuart A. Sutton (206) 685-6618 (V)
University of Washington (206) 616-3152 (F)
School of Library and Information Science
Box 352930
Seattle, WA 98195-2930 [log in to unmask]
GEM http://geminfo.org (Project)
http://www.TheGateway.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
-----Original Message-----
From: ALLISON, Myrl [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, December 06, 1999 6:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Audience category
>--On 6/12/99 2:37 PM +1000 ALLISON, Myrl wrote:
>
>> Is DCMI out on this debate and we do have to qualify 'audience' within
the
>> 15 Dublin Core set of elements?
>
>No, the DC Edu WG is not constrained by the Dublin Core version 1.1
>elements.
Thanks
Hello Liddy,
I support a minimal set of metadata elements and thought carefully before
coming to the point of suggesting a new element for 'audience'. AGLS has
the need for 'audience' and EDNA for 'userlevel' which is making a statement
that DC elements are not covering 'audience'. Trying to force 'audience'
into current DC standard by qualifiers defeats the semantic purpose of
metadata and I am concerned it makes the distinctions within the elements
far too complex. If they become complex they will not be used in accordance
with their intent.
... could we think about how much careful work was done to get 15 useful,
core elements and think about a set of 15 useful, core elements as perhaps
a good way for DC.education to go?
yes all for it - but not happy with DC.description or DC.subject as
candidates to fit 'audience'. Both of these assist the end user to find
resources by free text and controlled vocabularies. 'Audience' enables an
end user to limit a search to a context.
Regards
Myrl
Myrl Allison
Senior Librarian and Web Services Metadata Project Officer
Education Queensland
phone ..07 32370512 ...07 32370602 (Tuesday only)
email
[log in to unmask]
http://www.qed.qld.gov.au
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|