> They are available for review and comment at the following URLs:
> - http://wip.dublincore.org/test/dces
> - http://wip.dublincore.org/test/dcq
> - http://wip.dublincore.org/test/dcmitype
Sorry, I missed the first deadline too...
I know these are basically the schema that have been floating around
for a while now, but these are the thoughts that struck me this time
1. I'm not quite sure about the intention behind the date-stamping.
We have an issued date and modified date - is this to determine
currency of the content or to establish versioning?
Previously I thought it was to determine currency but with the new
addition of history links in dcterms:hasVersion I start to wonder whether
there should be better (machine-readable) access to previous versions of
elements/qualifiers? This would presumably mean all versions are stored
in this schema, or have a separate schema defining the previous versions?
I also found it curious that the link only went to the most recent previous
version, eg. alternative has a hasVersion of #alternative-002, but not an
2. Not withstanding discussions about moving to rdfs:Datatypes, it might
be nice to have a scheme class pre-defined for all of the 15/16 elements.
The first thing anyone who wants to add their own local encoding scheme
in an Application Profile to say Title (eg. for a dataset naming convention)
would be to add a TitleScheme class. It would be nice if this schema provided
these constructs out of the box to hang your own encoding schemes off.
Though, I guess by extension all the element refinements should also have a
scheme class declared, eg. CreatedScheme, TableOfContentsScheme,
3. Related to this, I know the IMT encoding scheme is only valid for the
Format element and not the medium element refinement . Do we have a
similar issue with W3CDTF - the schema makes it valid only for Date and
temporal, but not any of the Date element refinements (created, et. al.).
I guess this is a reflection of how the usage of W3CDTF is defined in the
DC Terms documents.
Though, looking back at the DC Qualifiers document, it wasn't clear whether
an encoding scheme valid for an element is also valid for its element
refinements - as discussed  IMT isn't intended for use in medium but surely
W3CDTF is intended for use in created, modified, etc.?
4. There has been some discussion about the titles for these schema. I
assumed discussion around this would wait until the bigger issues had been
resolved - perhaps that is now? Couldn't the titles be based/taken from their
dc:source documents? eg:
dces title: "Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: RDF Schema"
dces description: "This schema describes version 1.1 of the Dublin Core
Metadata Element Set as an RDF vocabulary for use in RDF applications.
The Dublin Core metadata element set is a standard for cross-domain
information resource description. These elements have been formally
endorsed as the CEN Workshop Agreement CWA 13874 and as the NISO
Standard Z39.85-2001, which was used as the basis for the Draft International
Standard balloted by ISO as DIS 15836."
[maybe we should leave out the "version 1.1" bit?]
dcq title: "DCMI Metadata Terms: RDF Schema"
dcq description: "This schema describes the DCMI Metadata Terms as an
RDF vocabulary for use in RDF applications. This schema includes all terms
(elements, element refinements, and encoding schemes) that are not part of
the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (which are described in a separate schema)."
[though the new DCMI Metadata Terms page actually lists ALL metadata terms
not just the non-15 elements and also includes the DCMI Type terms]
dcmitype title: "DCMI Type Vocabulary: RDF Schema"
dcmitype description: "This schema describes the DCMI Type Vocabulary as
an RDF vocabulary for use in RDF applications. The DCMI Type Vocabulary
provides a general, cross-domain list of approved terms that may be used
as values for the Resource Type element to identify the genre of a resource."
I'm thinking the descriptions need to make sense out of context (out of DC
context) as an RDF application might pull these up when validating a scrap
of RDF data it has just found. I wasn't sure whether to include stuff in the
current titles about namespaces or providing URIs...
National Library of New Zealand