On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, Gregor Hagedorn wrote:
>> Yes, your second example is the correct one. The dotted form of usage
>> (DC.Date.Created) is no longer recommended. The current DCMI
>> Recommendation about how to encode DC metadata in (X)HTML is
>>
>> Expressing Dublin Core in HTML/XHTML meta and link elements
>> http://dublincore.org/documents/dcq-html/
>>
>> which contains a full XHTML example of the kind of thing you are trying to
>> do in section 6.
>
> Why does Dublin core develop its own name-space recommendations and does not
> follow standard xml namespace conventions? I believe
>
> <link rel="dc:relation" href="http://www.example.org/" />
> <link rel="dcterms:references" href="http://www.example.org/publications/2002/176459.pdf" />
>
> would optionally allow to express (using xmlns) the full namespace that is
> referred to abbreviated through dc and dcterms. Currently the knowledge is
> rather behind the scenes and depends on shared DC-specific conventions.
In XHTML, the rel attribute on the link element and the name attribute on
the meta element are just strings. So "dc:relation" and
"dcterms:references" above would not be treated a XML QNames as you might
expect. They may look like QNames to the human reader but are not parsed
as such.
We did consider such usage when the DC XHTML spec was updated but were
advised that it might result in confusion with other ongoing work at W3C
to provide a simple way of encoding RDF in XHTML.
Given these two reasons against changing the recommendation to using the
dc:relation form, we decided to stick with the current DC.relation form.
Regards,
Andy
--
Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell
tel: +44 1225 383933 msn: [log in to unmask]
Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
|