Print

---

>>>"Weibel,Stu" said:
> There are several emergent issues in the DCQ Schema thread at this time:

<snip/>

> 3. Eric Miller has offered a rendition of an RDF schema that he believes
> represents the current state of DC qualifiers and has asked for additional
> attention to this scheme to determine its concordance with DCMI
> recommendations on elements and qualifiers:
>
>            http://www.w3.org/2001/11/26/dcq

I'm also wondering about how the EOR namespace stuff works here.


> 4. DCMI is on record as indicating that at this time the state of flux as
> regards RDF and XML schemas makes it undesireable to recommend one or
> another machine-processable encoding of DCMI metadata, and that the natural
> consequence of this is the necessity of supporting alternative encodings.
>
>
> My conclusion from this is that we need both an accurate RDF Schema
> representation and an accurate XML Schema representation, and that their
> style should be very similar (and hence easily interconvertible).

Yes.

> Is it possible that a small task force representing each of these camps
> might direct focussed and immediate attention to solving this problem in the
> near term?
>
> Eric is the natural leader of the RDF camp, and has in fact invested
> significant effort in articulating that version.  I am hoping that, as the
> digital library domain's major thrust towards interoperable metadata,
> technical representatives of the OAI might help us convert their encoding of
> DC into the canonical XML schema representation (but including both the base
> element set *and* qualifiers).

The RDF Schema stuff is pretty much there; as Erics' draft above I
think is a good basis.

I don't see these camps; these are technologies for different,
although related, applications.

So recently I've been doing a lot of work looking at W3C XML Schemas
for the DC in RDF/XML document and have had about three different
versions; as well as looking at W3C XML Schemas for the RDF/XML
syntax itself.

I would like to be involved in getting this sorted out from the DCMI
side; as well as from the W3C RDF Core Working Group side, in order
that these things get joined up and work correctly.  I'm the editor
of the RDF/XML Syntax working draft.


Here are some pointers to the various things I've been working on:


1) W3C XML Schema in Nov 11 draft
  http://dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/28/dcmes-xml/#appB


2) Later W3C XML Schema(s) based on a version written by Henry Thomson
   after discussion on the xmlschema-dev list:

  http://ilrt.org/discovery/2002/01/dcxml-xsd/

  where the top-level schema is
    http://ilrt.org/discovery/2002/01/dcxml-xsd/dcmes-xml-xsd.xsd

    importing
        http://ilrt.org/discovery/2002/01/dcxml-xsd/dcmes-dc.xsd
        http://ilrt.org/discovery/2002/01/dcxml-xsd/dcmes-rdf.xsd

    (plus the XML namespace)

  and there are 4 instance documents
    http://ilrt.org/discovery/2002/01/dcxml-xsd/ex0.dcml
    to ex3.dcxml

The original question and thread:
  http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xmlschema-dev/2002Jan/0051.html


3) W3C XML Schema for RDF/XML - work in progress, broken
  http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/09/rdf-xml-schema/


and with RDF Schema, some updated versions of the "RDF Schema"
schema (if you see what I mean)

  http://ilrt.org/discovery/2001/09/rdf-schema-tests/


Dave