> With no intented hair-splitting, in which document is it formally explicited?

I’m looking at

http://dublincore.org/documents/domain-range/

Ah, indeed, but it's not in sync on this at least with http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms which has a "DCMI Recommendation" status, whereas the above has no declared status at all, neither has, BTW, the RDF schema at http://dublincore.org/2008/01/14/dcterms.rdf, a fact I'm very surprised to discover. I thought DC was better at eating its own dog food.

(but I confess to being somewhat out of date with my knowledge of the status of any of these documents).

---

From: DCMI Architecture Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernard Vatant
Sent: 02 September 2009 11:18

To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: rdfs:range for dcterms:subject and other "open-range" properties

 

Hi Andy

2009/9/2 Andy Powell <[log in to unmask]>

> I understand therefore your take on this as being a non-issue, and it's up to applications to deal with the absence of range.

That is my understanding (except that I disagree with your assertion that the range is missing – it’s not missing, it is explicitly set to rdfs:Resource).

With no intented hair-splitting, in which document is it formally explicited? It's neither in http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/ nor in http://dublincore.org/2008/01/14/dcterms.rdf as far as I can see.

> OTOH, as an informative note, could DC suggest/recommend as a best practice to use some classes, such as skos:Concept?

I tend to agree, and think there’s probably room for this kind of guidance in

Guidelines for Dublin Core Application Profiles (Working Draft)

http://dublincore.org/usage/meetings/2008/09/berlin/dcap-guidelines/

though I’m not overly clear what status that document has?

Something like “Where the value of dc:subject is “an idea or notion”, recommended best practice is to use a skos:Concept.”

I guess SKOS folks would be very happy with that.
 

(Note: I’m making the assumption here that this is indeed recommended best practice!).

It's indeed recommended or strongly suggested from the SKOS viewpoint. See http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-primer/#secindexing
"While the SKOS vocabulary itself does not include a mechanism for associating an arbitrary resource with a skos:Concept, implementors can turn to other vocabularies. Dublin Core, for instance, provides a dct:subject property ..."

Actually as a reminder there used to be in the first SKOS versions a skos:subject property which was deprecated under the rationale that it was already defined by DC.


Bernard

 

---

Eduserv has moved office! For details visit www.eduserv.org.uk/contacts