JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DC-ARCHITECTURE Archives


DC-ARCHITECTURE Archives

DC-ARCHITECTURE Archives


DC-ARCHITECTURE@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DC-ARCHITECTURE Home

DC-ARCHITECTURE Home

DC-ARCHITECTURE  February 2012

DC-ARCHITECTURE February 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: DCAM call, an interpretation - for discussion...!

From:

Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

DCMI Architecture Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 1 Feb 2012 12:21:49 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (54 lines)

On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 10:56:19AM -0500, Tom Baker wrote:
> 2012-01-30 DCAM call - 11:00 EST
> 
> Attended:    TomB (chair), DianeH, StuartS, AaronR, MichaelP, RichardU, CoreyH, GordonD,
>              KaiE, JonP, AntoineI, MarkM
> This report: http://wiki.dublincore.org/index.php/DCAM_Revision/TeleconReport-20120130

Here's my attempt to _interpret_ the call.  These free paraphrases are meant
to attract correction and clarification...

    Kai sees DCAM as a model for describing the constructs in metadata.  The
    model would be expressed natively as an RDF vocabulary of properties and
    classes (e.g., where Description Sets and Descriptions are Named Graphs),
    analogously to how the SKOS vocabulary describes thesauri and the FOAF
    vocabulary describes people.  However, this model would in principle be
    usable in contexts that are not RDF-aware -- just as the SKOS model is in
    principle usable without RDF.

    Jon sees DCAM as a bridge between RDF and XML -- a context for expressing
    the semanticss and constraints of an application profile in a generic
    manner.  One arrives at DCAM by starting from two different ends -- working
    backwards from RDF, but also working backwards from XML.  
    
    Corey sees the need for a formalized way to express semantics and
    constraints that is more generic than XML per se, but validatable like XML
    schemas, because alot of systems are and will continue to be XML-based but
    not RDF-aware.  The need is to express data in XML but still fit with the
    RDF data model.  This is less about validating RDF per se than about
    mapping RDF out to systems that support only XML.

    Aaron sees the value of DCAM and DCAP as expression of constraints not just
    on one particular XML implementation, but (generically) on a variety of
    serializations -- "a format-independent model for defining metadata for a
    DCAP" (Jon).

    There was general agreement that DCAM should be the point where XML and 
    RDF meet.

    One starting point should be a "gap analysis": what do we want to express
    that is not already expressible in RDF?  Tom has started such an analysis
    with his comparison of the constructs and terminology used in DCAM, DC-TEXT,
    and RDF 1.1, with some proposals for DCAM 2.0 (e.g., harmonizing 
    dcam:memberOf and dcam:VocabularyEncodingScheme with skos:ConceptScheme and
    skos:inScheme).

    Antoine and Jon argued for a test-driven approach to developing DCAM -- 
    provide examples and test cases in at least RDF and XML.  Indeed, just
    trying this might be easier than discussing it in the abstract.  Testing
    should start early in the process.


-- 
Tom Baker <[log in to unmask]>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

November 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager