Dear Tom,
I have a question on the attributes from the viewpoint of multilingual
description. I'm CCing this message to DC-international (localization
and internationalization group) since the subscribers might have interests
in this issue.
Given that a term is translated into a language(s) which is officially
approved by a local community(ies), do you mean that "See also" is to
be used to point the translation (or translations)?
Or, no linking from the central description to local but official descriptions?
I'm thinking that DC Term descriptions in non-English languages could have
the same set of descriptive elements, e.g. "Label", "Definition", etc..
And, in addition, each description of an element could have a link to
the corresponding element to the Official description in English,
which maintained in the central registry.
Thank you,
-- Shigeo
In <20020417162514.A1856@LEPIDUS>, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 16:25:14 +0200
>> Reply-To: "This list, which supersedes dc-datamodel, dc-schema, and
>> dc-implementors, i" <[log in to unmask]>
>> From: Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Attributes of DCMI metadata terms
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Attached at the end of this message is an appendix showing
>> which attributes have been used to describe DCMI terms
>> since 1996. Based on these sets of attributes, and in light
>> of current discussion on this list, I suggest here a set of
>> attributes for "DCMI term declarations" and suggest that a "See
>> Also" link point to further background information collected
>> by the Usage Board as documentation for new-term proposals.
>>
>> I am currently working on the long-awaited Consolidated Term
>> Declaration (or perhaps Dictionary) that brings DCMES 1.1,
>> the Dublin Core Qualifiers, and the terms approved by Usage
>> Board in 2001 into one document using a consistent set of
>> attributes. Finishing that task depends on resolving the
>> problem discussed here.
>>
>> I would appreciate if some of you could give this a careful
>> read from various points of view -- Usage Board, Registry,
>> and Architecture (eg, RDF schemas). A caveat: I have not
>> tested this by formatting all of the DCMI terms yet --
>> uh, I'd rather get consensus on the attributes first...
>> In particular, I'm not very happy with the jargon for "name of
>> term", "namespace URI of term", and "URI of term's namespace".
>>
>> The consolidated term document will supersede all previous
>> documents and become the definitive declaration of DCMI terms
>> and therefore the basis for any machine-understandable
>> representations thereof.
>>
>> I would also like to hear opinions on where this set of
>> attributes should reside -- perhaps in a special Usage Board
>> document, though it is not clear to me that the Usage Board
>> should be the group to maintain the schema attributes.
>>
>> Also, I cite what I see as the major documents setting the
>> context for this set of attributes:
>> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-namespace/
>> http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/process/
>> http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/mission/
>> Am I overlooking any?
>>
>> I propose:
>>
>> ------------start-----------------------------------------------
>> A "DCMI term declaration" (see
>> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-namespace/) should contain:
>>
>> Label The human-readable label assigned to
>> the qualifier.
>> Definition The definition of the term.
>> - or -
>> A statement that represents the concept
>> and essential nature of the term.
>> Comment Additional information associated with
>> the term.
>> - or -
>> Information concerning the possible
>> application of the proposed term
>> See Also A link to more information about the term.
>>
>> Name of term The unique token assigned to the term
>> URI of terms's eg, http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ or
>> namespace http://purl.org/dc/terms/
>> Namespace URI of term eg, http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title or
>> http://purl.org/dc/terms/audience
>> Status Cross-Domain, Domain-Specific, or Obsolete
>> (typology to be taken from
>> http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/process)
>> Type of term Element, Element Refinement, or Encoding Scheme
>> (typology to be taken from
>> http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/mission/)
>> Term qualified If an Element Refinement, the Element qualified
>>
>> One "See Also" link should point to the following
>>
>> Examples Examples of use of the proposed term, making
>> clear what type of literal values are expected
>> Why needed A justification of the need for the proposed term
>> Related DCMI terms A discussion of possible overlap with existing
>> terms
>> Related non-DCMI An annotated listing of related terms in non-DCMI
>> terms metadata vocabularies
>> Impact on An annotated listing of existing applications that
>> applications could be affected by recognition of this term
>> About the proposers A pointer to a description, in standard
>> form (to be specified) of the working group or
>> organization putting forward the proposal: its
>> scope, aims, a brief history, current status,
>> and a pointer to archives.
>>
>> As per Roland's suggestion, the "namespace URI of term" should
>> not be a "clickable" link on any Web pages made from this term
>> declaration to avoid the usual questions about "what is at the
>> end of the namespace".
>>
>> ------------end-----------------------------------------------
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tom
>>
>>
>> APPENDIX
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> Elements Version 1.0, September 1998
>> http://dublincore.org/documents/1998/09/dces/
>> and
>> RFC 2413, September 1998
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2413.txt
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Except for "Label", the attributes of the metadata terms were
>> not explicitly labelled or discussed in Version 1.0 or RFC 2413.
>>
>> [Name?] a natural-language name for the element
>> Label: a "formal single-word label" for use in
>> "encoding schemes"
>> [Definition?] a definition was provided
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>> Elements Version 1.1
>> http://dublincore.org/documents/1999/07/02/dces/
>> -------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> This version recast the element definitions using attributes
>> defined in ISO/IEC 11179:
>>
>> Name The label assigned to the data element
>> Identifier The unique identifier assigned to the data element
>> Definition A statement that clearly represents the concept and
>> essential nature of the data element
>> Comment A remark concerning the application of the data element
>>
>> The following ISO/IEC 11179 attributes were assumed to hold for
>> all of the elements:
>>
>> Version The version of the data element, here "1.1" (for all)
>> Registration The entity authorised to register the data element,
>> Authority here "Dublin Core Metadata Initiative" (for all)
>> Language The language in which the data element is specified,
>> here "en" (for all)
>> Obligation Indicates if the data element is required to always
>> or sometimes be present (contain a value), here
>> "Optional" (for all)
>> Datatype Indicates the type of data that can be represented
>> in the value of the data element, here
>> "Character String" (for all)
>> Maximum Indicates any limit to the repeatability of the data
>> Occurrence element, here "Unlimited" (always)
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dublin Core Qualifiers, July 2000
>> http://dublincore.org/documents/2000/07/11/dcmes-qualifiers/
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> The introduction explained that the properties of qualifiers --
>> in particular the terms Name and Label -- differed with respect
>> to those defined for the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set
>> Version 1.1, reflecting a decision to bring Dublin Core schema
>> terminology in line with terminology in the XML community to
>> promote easier integration of Dublin Core schemas in XML and RDF
>> environments.
>>
>> Name The unique token assigned to the qualifier.
>> Label The human-readable label assigned to the qualifier.
>> Definition A statement that represents the concept and essential
>> nature of the qualifier.
>> Comment Additional information associated with the qualifier
>> (if available).
>> See Also A link to more information about the qualifier (if
>> available).
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Current requirements for new-term proposals to Usage Board
>> http://128.253.121.110/DC-UB/DC-UBprocess8.html
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Name A suggested unique token for use in encodings
>> Label A suggested human-readable label for the proposed term
>> Definition The definition of the term
>> Comment Information concerning the possible application of the
>> proposed term
>> Examples Examples of use of the proposed term, making clear what
>> type of literal values are expected
>> Type of term Is the proposed term an "element," or an "element
>> refinement" (as defined in
>> http://dublincore.org/usage/documents/mission.shtml)
>> [NOTE: Encoding schemes will be registered using a
>> separate process]
>> Term qualified If the proposed term is a element refinement, which term
>> does it qualify?
>> Why needed A justification of the need for the proposed term
>> Proposed status Is the term proposed as Domain-Specific or Cross-Domain?
>> Related DCMI terms A discussion of possible overlap with existing terms
>> Related non-DCMI An annotated listing of related terms in non-DCMI
>> terms metadata vocabularies
>> Impact on An annotated listing of existing applications that
>> applications could be affected by recognition of this term
>> About the proposers A pointer to a description, in standard
>> form (to be specified) of the working group or
>> organization putting forward the proposal: its scope,
>> aims, a brief history, current status, and a pointer
>> to archives.
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 +49-2241-14-2619
=========================================================
SUGIMOTO, Shigeo, Ph.D.
Professor
University of Library and Information Science (ULIS)
postal address: Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8550, JAPAN
phones: +81-298-59-1348(office), +81-298-59-1556 (lab.)
+81-298-59-1090(ULIS, Research Assistance Office)
fax: +81-298-59-1093 email: [log in to unmask]
|
