On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 03:47:34PM +0200, Roland Schwaenzl wrote:
> > This being the case, I should think we would want to avoid
> > declaring refinements more than one level deep, especially
> > if the basic distinctions between C, C, and P are at all
> > controversial. Making all AgentRoles sub-properties of just
> > dc:contributor makes sense in this regard. I should think it
> > would also make it simpler to solve the problem of blessing
> > external vocabularies.
>
> Just the opposite. "One level deep" is a requirement
> for the DC ontology, which will block applications
> to refine refinements. We never could recognize the entries of
> a structured "agentRoles" as compliant with DC.
> I consider such requirement
> as harmful for DC deployment.
Specifically, I meant to say that I shouldn't think _DCMI
itself_ would want to be in the business of declaring
refinements more than one level deep -- not that we should do
anything to block applications that do have more hierarchical
refinements (such as a structured list of agent roles).
On the contrary, I should think we would want to promote
consistent methods whereby various user communities or DCMI
itself can declare how such non-DCMI ontologies relate to
DC elements.
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
|