On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Roland Schwaenzl wrote:
> > Looking at
> > http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/abstract-model/
> > I noticed that the description of Qualified DC in section 3 specifies
> > that each property must be an element or element refinement recommended
> > by the DCMI,
> Think Rachel's already made a remark on the issue. This restriction is not really what
> we want.
I tend to disagree - but I guess that we probably could go either way on
If a Qualified DC metadata record can include external properties then the
logical conclusion is that a metadata record that contains 50 IEEE LOM
properties and 1 DC property is a Qualified DC metadata record. That
feels non-sensical (or, at least, non-intuitive) to me.
A metadata record made up of 50 LOM properties and 1 DC property is a LOM
record that 'incorporates' qualified DC (IMHO).
> We first should say, what model DCMI has w.r.t. metadata in general.
Yes, I agree that this is a possible approach. We *could* define a
DCMI Abstract Metadata Model
which would be broader than the model I propose.
The main benefit in doing so would be if others, e.g. IEEE LOM, were to
adopt the same model.
That said, I think there's enough in the current document to allow people
like IEEE LOM to adopt the same model if they desire and write it up as an
IEEE LOM abstract model.
> Then we can continue in indicating what a simple DC or qualified DC interpretation
> of a given record should/could mean.
> Seems un-practical to me to insist on using DC vocabulary exclusively in a record -
Where is this insisted? The document certainly doesn't insist on this.
The only restriction is on what a metadata record labelled 'qualified DC'
looks like. The document explicitly acknowledges that most real-world
applications are not 'pure' qualified DC.
> > but it does not specify that encoding schemes are limited
> > to those recommended by DCMI.
> > I wasn't sure whether this was intentional or not?
I think encoding schemes are different to properties. It seems fine to me
that a qualified DC record can contain encoding schemes from external
namespaces. It's only a gut feeling though I guess.
Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell +44 1225 383933
Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/