The RDFa primer is a good starting point but it entrenches the legacy
namespace. It uses rel="license" in section 2.1 then goes on to use
dc:title and dc:creator in 2.2. Since the purpose is to help machines
understand the web, it would be more meaningful to use
rel="dcterms:license".
W3C should be encouraged to use the range of more precise descriptions
dcterms allows.
Regards
David
David Bromage
Policy and Strategic Projects
Government Information Management Branch
National Archives of Australia
PO Box 7425
Canberra Business Centre ACT 2610
T (02) 6212 3731 F (02) 6212 3989 M 0418 394 778
[log in to unmask]
www.naa.gov.au
-----Original Message-----
From: General DCMI discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Liddy Nevile
Sent: Sunday, 4 January 2009 9:06 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: DC metadata in docs as part of HTML
First - Happy and Safe New Year to everyone.
I am wondering how many people have been using RDF/A to put their
metadata into the docs so that instead of just identifying something as
a heading, for example, it can be identified as the title (or
dc:title) and another bit of text as the author's name (dc:creator) and
affiliation and a particular link as a reference to the source
documents, etc?
This is so much smarter than trying to bung stuff into a meta tag, it
seems to me - see http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer/
Problem, as I see it, is that this is a technique for those using XHTML
and most people are using HTML, and it is not part of valid HTML. I am
wondering if there is interest in this problem - if people want to use
RDF/A, surely it should be included in the new versions of HTML? (HTML 5
is being developed right now.)
I would like it a lot because it would also make it much easier for
people to do really significant and helpful things about accessibility,
tagging content for what it offers and helping people find alternatives
to content components that they cannot use...
Liddy
|