On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Sigfrid Lundberg, Lub NetLab wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Thomas Baker wrote:
> > I'm reasonably happy with the URIs above but wonder where the Usage
> > Board could put any new DCMI elements outside the core. Something like
> > http://purl.org/dc/etc/ as a catch-call for non-core elements and
> > qualifiers would do the trick (we'd need a better name).
>
> The modularity is a virtue. On the other hand, it has its price, in
> readability and looong lists of name space URIs. I regard this is issue as
> a technical/architectural one. In Eric's /2000/03/13-* musings, the
> element refinements and the encoding schemes lives in one file. This may,
> or may not be the optimal solution. Again, I think this a technical
> issue. When these beasts are compiled into triples -- arcs and nodes. They
> will live on one single database anyway, and you cannot tell the
> difference.
Yes indeed. With the current proposal, however, it looks to me like an
element such as Audience (proposed by the Education WG) would fall
between the two modular stools of http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ and
http://purl.org/dc/qualifiers/ -- assuming for the sake of argument
that we would want to put it into a DCMI namespace other than that of
the Education WG.
Of course, we could just put Audience into
http://purl.org/dc/qualifiers/ and be done with it -- as you point out,
they would all be compiled into a single database anyway. Or we could
take the opportunity to give that qualifier space a more generic name.
Or we should perhaps already think of an additional namespace URI for
non-core elements, though I find that option aesthetically less
appealing.
Tom
_______________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask]
GMD Library
Schloss Birlinghoven +49-2241-14-2352
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-14-2619
|