JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DC-ARCHITECTURE Archives


DC-ARCHITECTURE Archives

DC-ARCHITECTURE Archives


DC-ARCHITECTURE@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DC-ARCHITECTURE Home

DC-ARCHITECTURE Home

DC-ARCHITECTURE  May 2002

DC-ARCHITECTURE May 2002

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: What is a text file - use of standards.

From:

Roland Schwaenzl <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

This list, which supersedes dc-datamodel, dc-schema, and dc-implementors, i" <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 30 May 2002 17:22:34 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (187 lines)

> From [log in to unmask] Thu May 30 12:12 MET 2002
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Disposition: inline
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i, Unixmail for Windows 0.6
> Date:         Thu, 30 May 2002 12:12:45 +0200
> From: Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject:      Re: What is a  text file -  use of standards.
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 08:06:36PM +0200, Roland Schwaenzl wrote:
> > > +++|   <rdf:Property rdf:about="http://purl.org/dc/terms/alternative">
> > > +++|     <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Alternative</rdfs:label>
> > > +++|     <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">Any form of the title used as a substitute or
> > > +++|       alternative to the formal title of the resource.</rdfs:comment>
> > > +++|     <dc:description xml:lang="en">This qualifier can include Title
> > > +++|       abbreviations as well as translations.</dc:description>
> > > +++|     <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title"/>
> > > ---|     <rdfs:isDefinedBy rdf:resource="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"/>
> > > +++|     <dcterms:issued>2000-07-11</dcterms:issued>
> > >    |   </rdf:Property>
> ..
> > > The RDFS representation lacks information on Status, Term Type,
> > > and Versioning (VMS-ID, Decision, Date modified, Supersedes).  If the
> > > schema is sufficient as support for RDF applications, this means that
> > > an RDF application would not need these things?
> >
> > It has dcq:modified, where modifications are known to the public.
> > As the integrity of applications requires existing terms never change semantics,
> > modifications are limited to changes of non-vital properties of the resources.
>
> I'm not following you here...  The RDFS term declaration for
> "alternative" (above) does not have dcterms:modified, only a
> dcterms:issued.  It is true that the namespace policy limits
> the scope of modifications to things that do not fundamentally
> alter the semantics of a term, but Section III of that policy
> also requires any change to a term declaration, no matter how
> trivial, to be reflected in versioning information: "In all
> (!) cases, any (!) changes to DCMI terms or term declarations
> will result in an update to the versioning information carried
> in the DCMI recommendation and/or DCMI term declaration
> associated with that term."  This is the guideline I have
> been following in developing the documentation posted at
> http://www.gmd.de/People/Thomas.Baker/usage/terms/dc/.
>
> > > According to http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema,
> > > "isDefinedBy" means "Indicates a resource containing and
> > > defining the subject resource".
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/01/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/#s2.3.5
>
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-rdf-schema-20000327/#s2.3.5
>
> > should clarify your concern.
> > [It mentions dc explicitly].
>
> Hmm, I get "Sorry not found."
>
> > > I am confused because
> > > I think of "alternative" as being uniquely _identified_
> > > by the string http://purl.org/dc/terms/alternative but
> > > actually _defined_ and documented in the Web resource
> > > http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/dc/ (to be precise, at
> > > http://dublincore.org/usage/terms/dc/#alternative-002).
> >
> > DC has in a formal fashion defined, what it's namespace URI's
> > are. Before the DCMI namespace rec was made one could have
> > argued as you do. It's an advantage for DC to have this standard.
>
> This gets back to the basic distinction between "canonical"
> (or "authoritative" or "definitive") representations of DCMI
> terms and representations derived from the same, such as an
> RDF schema.
>

Not at all. RDF is not a miracle, but a spezified gadget -
just as XML Schema.

The schema is saying in it's metadata, which sources it uses.

>
>
> If I have correctly understood you (and Harry), the intention in
> creating an RDF schema is not to provide "the" definitive
> representation -- that is provided currently by Recommendation
> documents on the DCMI Web site, in the near future by the
> Usage-Board-maintained text files I am editing, and in the
> medium term perhaps by a VMS database -- but merely to present
> the definitive semantics in a form usable by RDF applications.
>
> > > > [This doesn't say, that all RDF applications will just use
> > > > such a slim version. ]
>
> Then I have correctly understood that this particular RDF
> schema is but one possible representation among others, even
> other RDF schemas.

Sure...the essential point is just, that the dc website should not
distribute RDF Schema, which make erronous assertions.
Most importantly it should not define resources in the namespaces,
which haven't been accepted by Usage.


>
> > > I am assuming that one could declare the "missing" information
> > > from my text description as RDF assertions as well...
> >
> > That's not the point.
> ..
> > How the vocabulary management system is supposed to
> > work internally is not my current business.
>
> If the RDF schema is not presented as, and does not declare
> itself to be, the canonical representation, then I agree that
> loading versioning information into that schema may indeed not
> be the point.
>

There is no such claim.

> However, I am very much concerned by the following construct,
> taken as a whole:
>
> 1) a Namespace Policy saying that DCMI terms are (in effect)
>    canonically identified by URIs; together with
>
> 2) a resolver that resolves the namespace URIs to an RDF
>    schema (as suggested by Harry); together with
>
> 3) an RDF schema in which each term declaration says it
>    "isDefinedBy" the very same namespace URI; and
>
Please: This is an RDF construct. Don't argue by English grammar.
That's not the one, which applies.


> 4) in which the term declarations do not declare or point to the
>    full historical versioning information of each term but in fact
>    present a subset of the fuller information derived from
>    some other set of documents or from a vocabulary management
>    system.
>
> To me, such a construct is misleading because it creates a
> self-referential circle, saying in effect that "DCMI declares
> this RDF schema to be _the_ definitive representation." Whereas
> -- as you have yourself confirmed -- the RDF schema is but "a"
> definitive representation.

NO! Please read the metadata (dc:source).

>
> If the semantics of "rdfs:isDefinedBy" dictate that it be used
> simply to point to the namespace within which the individual
> terms are situated, then "isDefinedBy" should by all means be
> used that way.  But in that case, in my opinion, the property
> declaration should include some sort of pointer to the
> definitive resource from which that particular representation
> was derived and where the versioning information may be found.

In case there is something the pointer goes to the relevant
Usage decision. I don't know to which other documents you want
to see a pointer. To the terms-latest.html ? That's just in draft
status - with wrong hyperlinks.

It took me a while to figure out some working URL's.
Also DC1.1 and the DCQ rec are not cited correctly.

This document will undergo changes till it
becomes stable. I find it rather confusing, that it doesn't
give dates.


In case terms-latest converges there will be no problem to add pointers.





rs
>
> 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 +49-2241-14-2619
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager