Liddy,
> I have been thinking about accessibility and metadata and have changed
> some of my ideas. I'd like some feedback from others with experience.
>
> I originally thought that we should think about solving the
> accessibility community's problem of pointing to alternative resources
> by using a new dc:relation:isEquivalentTo qualifier - now I am more
> interested in having a dc:relation:isAlternativeTo qualification.
> Equivalent and alternative content are not exactly the same but
> equivalent content is alternative, so that works.
DAML/OIL provide similar syntax already. I wonder if, rather than defining
new terms, you could take advantage of that work.
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/05/01/damlref.html is an excellent reference
for the syntax.
Regards... harry
|