 |
 |
On Mon, Sep 16, 2002 at 05:29:12PM +0200, Roland Schwaenzl wrote: > > The registry "currently" uses the DC RDF schemas as a data source, and > > physical object is not included in the current version of the schemas. They > > will be updated at the same time. Since updating the schemas can be > > disruptive to implementers we plan to periodically update them in batch > > (probably twice a year). > > > > The long-term solution is to not use the schemas as input to the registry. > > A better solution is to maintain the DC vocabulary in the vocabulary > > management system and provide an application interface for the registry to > > access this info. > > To have Schema out of sync with the registry appears as a problem to me. > Why you view it as disruptive to implementors to give up to date information > in Schema language? > In fact inconsistencies in DC documentation form a major source > of confusion for implementors. I was just going to make the same point. The Registry WG charter, Road Map, and related documents all emphasize the requirement of providing authoritative and up-to-date information. In principle, it should never be out of synch with other DCMI documentation. Tom -- Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask] Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-171-408-5784 Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-144-1408