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: Karen Coyle on application profile design patterns (2008)

From:

Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

DCMI Architecture Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:16:48 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (185 lines)

Richard, et al.,

I developed those few 'design patterns' while working on the DCAP 
document, not DCAM. I would expect that there would be a progression 
from DCAM to DCAP -- from "simple" and basic patterns to patterns with 
more complexity and application-like constraints. Maybe something like 
going from atoms to molecules to simple organisms.

My particular interest was in providing examples of commonly needed 
structures that people could copy and adapt while creating APs. I still 
think this would be a good idea, I just haven't had time for it.

kc

On 2/28/12 11:54 AM, Richard Urban wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Tom are you suggesting that Karen's "patterns" for DSPs are a *model*
> that we can follow for coming up with DCAM patterns, or that these *are*
> DCAM patterns?
>
> Currently Description Set Profiles seem very oriented towards syntaxes
> that should be used in particular contexts or "applications." But I find
> that many of the things that DSPs want to do is provide some ontological
> distinctionsabout the kinds of things described and which properties
> (and classes of values/vocabularies) that should be used to describe
> them. This seems close to the idea of *interpretations* that Alistair
> alludes to in several of his e-mails and is part of the model-theoretic
> semantics of RDF[1].
> In some ways this feels like it turns the conversation on it's head, we
> are still talking about constraints, but by presenting an account of
> what is allowed (or licensed) rather than what is prohibited.
>
> For a simple language like RDF, this interpretation is mainly about
> specifying some baseline classes and relationships between classes (such
> as what constitute other classes - i.e. subjects, predicates, and
> objects make up a statement, etc.
>
> But once we've specified the ability to create classes and
> relationships, we might also want interpretations that are particular to
> a particular domain by specifying the kinds of things we wish to talk
> about and what properties those things might have.
>
> I see DCAM as trying to achieve the first part of this - what are the
> sentences we can use, what are the classes, and what relationships are
> allowed. In Karen's patterns they are similar to the idea that there are
> statements and "strings" (or literal values that refer to themselves).
> But some of the other patterns here and in Gordon's list seem to be
> better situated in the ontological part of an interpretation. What kinds
> of things are in the world and what properties do they have? (Isn't this
> what we really mean when we say "mandatory if applicable"? - i.e. if
> something is an x, then it must have property y" The Dublin Core Terms
> provide a basic set of properties that get us started on specifying this
> part of an interpretation, but don't say much about how we use them to
> construct statements.
>
> In order to do more complicated things, we may also need to add
> additional rules to an interpretation, for example the idea of
> disjointedness (x cannot be a y). Depending on what kinds of rules we
> need, we need different levels of expressivity. I think that the list of
> patterns we have so far could be divided by some of these requirements.
> For example:
>
> * "a statement with strings" is handled by the simplest tools that RDF
> provides: RDFS
> * "mandatory" would require the specification of some class of resources
> that universally has some property. To do this would require a more
> expressive tool, like OWL.
> * "mandatory if applicable" is a tough one, because it means that some
> things do have a property and some things don't - but it usually boils
> down to then explicitly specifying which things do and which things
> don't. (not whether a record has it or not, but which THINGS)
>
> I'll see if I can come up with a quick categorization of the patterns we
> have so far along these lines.
>
> What does this mean for DCAM then, in a way that is more than an
> abstract syntax?
>
> DCAM should provide the basic tools for constructing statements and sets
> of statements.
> DCAM should provide the mechanisms that allow a particular domain (an
> application?) to specify a valid interpretation (what kinds of things am
> i concerned with, what properties do those things have, and what
> concepts do I use to describe them (i.e a vocabulary or encoding scheme)).
> Of course, all of this is colored by my understanding of what RDF is
> trying to do. The challenge here seems to do it in a way that is not
> entirely dependent on just RDF, but allows other ways to express
> interpretations that may be more flexible for domains/applications that
> are less formal.
>
> Is this a helpful/holistic way to look at the relationship between DCAM
> and DSP?
>
> Richard Urban
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#interp
>
> On Feb 21, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Thomas Baker wrote:
>
>> In 2008, Karen started to enumerate some common design patterns. We have
>> provisionally concluded that a revised DCAM would need to be be based
>> on, and
>> illustrated with, examples. Here -- minus the DSP angle-bracket
>> examples -- is
>> the starter set of patterns. They are similar in nature to the
>> examples that
>> Alistair penciled into his draft.
>>
>> Can we take this as a start, or does anyone want to propose a
>> different type of
>> examples (or patterns)? As Antoine has suggested, the effort of just
>> trying it
>> might be less than the effort of discussing it in the abstract...
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> http://dublincore.org/dcmirdataskgroup/apDesigns
>>
>> Some Application Profile Design Patterns
>> These design patterns are based on the Dublin Core Description Set
>> Profile (DSP). The DSP structure is a single description set that
>> contains one or more descriptions, each of which contains one or more
>> metadata statements. Both the description and the metadata statements
>> can define constraints on usage.
>>
>> Statement: A Simple String
>> The simplest metadata statement describes a property that takes a
>> simple string value ("literal"), with no constraints.
>> [... example ...]
>>
>> Mandatory and Repeatable
>> Both description templates and statement templates can be coded as
>> mandatory/optional and repeatable/not repeatable. This is done
>> using the values "minimum" and "maximum". The most commonly used
>> values are:
>> [... example values ...]
>>
>> The following code defines a property ("title") that is required
>> and not repeatable:
>> [... example ...]
>>
>> Using Controlled Lists
>> One way to assure consistency of metadata use is to require that
>> values be taken from a controlled list. Controlled lists can be
>> short ("yes" "no" "maybe") or they can be long (such as the Library
>> of Congress Subject Headings, which number about 250,000).
>>
>> To define a property as taking a member of a controlled list as its
>> value using the terms of the DC Application Profile, the controlled
>> list is called a "Vocabulary Encoding Scheme" and the list itself
>> is represented with its identifier, a URI. Use of a list can be
>> mandatory or optional.
>>
>> This code illustrates a "subject" property that optionally can use
>> terms from the LC Subject Heading list.
>> [... example ...]
>>
>> This code shows a subject property that requires the use of a term
>> from the LCSH list:
>> [... example ...]
>>
>> If you have a short list that you wish to embed in the DSP you can
>> do that using the "LiteralOption". Each term is listed, and values
>> must be taken from the list:
>> [... example ...]
>>
>> You can support multiple languages with the LiteralOption by
>> including the XML "lang" attribute:
>> [... example ...]
>>
>> --
>> Tom Baker <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

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