Dan has asked me to forward his reply (below) as he is
using an email account not permissioned for this list.
Misha
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Brickley [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 22 June 2005 11:36
To: Misha Wolf
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: DC using another syntax -- Clarification required
Misha Wolf wrote:
>[Apologies for cross-posting]
>
>Hi folks,
>
>The International Press Telecommunications Council (IPTC) is
>interested in using DC for our new generation of standards. These
>standards will employ the News Metadata Framework, described in the
>News Metadata Framework Requirements specification, available at:
> http://www.iptc.org/dev/
>
>Our plan is to use a different syntax from any of those described on
>the DC Web site. This syntax will employ QNames in attribute values
>and is related to the work being done in the W3C towards XHTML 2.0.
>
>How do we get an authoritative statement of whether it is OK to use
>the acronym "DC" and the DC namespace if we are employing the DC
>semantics but not one of the DC-approved syntaxes?
>
>
http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/ provides an abstraction
over all DC syntaxes.
http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/#app-b defines a
relationship to RDF.
That doc notes that [[
almost all aspects of the DCMI abstract model are supported by the RDF
encoding guidelines
though, at the time of writing, some issues about how best to handle
/description sets/ still need to be resolved.
]]
Since the XHTML 2.0 work serves as an alternate encoding of RDF,
sticking close to that
design should keep you on track. IMHO, if the syntax you use has a
well-defined mapping
into RDF (eg. by being exactly the same as the XHTML2 design, or by
having an XSLT transform
into RDF/XML documented using GRDDL,
http://www.w3.org/TeamSubmission/grddl/ ) then
you should be OK. By OK, I mean, in the same situation as anyone else
using an RDF notation for
DC.
(Note that this message shouldn't be taken as an authoritative statement
by DC, it's just my
personal take on the situation...).
cheers,
Dan
------------ ----------------------------------------------------
Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com
To find out more about Reuters Products and Services visit http://www.reuters.com/productinfo
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be
the views of Reuters Ltd.
|