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  March 2003

DC-ARCHITECTURE March 2003

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Proposed DCMI RDF Schema Changes

From:

Douglas Campbell <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

DCMI Architecture Group <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 18 Mar 2003 17:39:04 +1200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (87 lines)

> 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
'round...

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 
#alternative-001.

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, 
isVersionOfScheme, etc...

3. Related to this, I know the IMT encoding scheme is only valid for the 
Format element and not the medium element refinement [1].  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 [1] 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...

Thanx,
Douglas Campbell
National Library of New Zealand

[1] http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0207&L=dc-architecture&T=0&F=&S=&P=808

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
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