A 08:55 19/11/98 +0900, Sugimoto Shigeo a crit :
>I think we should clarify a version/translation of what.
>In my case, I've translated a reference description of DC Simple
>into Japanese. The document I created, say the Japanese Reference
>Description of DC Simple, is a "translation" of the Reference
>Description of DC Simple.
>I believe my document coveys the same semantics expressed in the
>reference description (in English) to readers, i.e. same "version"
>of DC Simple.
>On the other hand, I would call my document a Japanese "version" of
>DC Simple reference description, i.e., a different "version" of
>the reference description.
>My point is:
> DC Simple has only one version (= DC1.0).
> DC Simple has multiple versions of reference description
> expressed in multiple languages.
>Is this make sense?
Yes it does make sense. I would add that there were also different versions
of the English reference description. At some point I found it hard to keep
my French translation in line with the current reference description
(document) since they were all using the same URL. I was a relief when we
decided that the translation does not need to be literal.
[local] French versions of DC (if any) would be DC schemas with specific
qualifiers, or extended elements, for specific French communauties.
This is why I am not in favor of using the word "version". It is too
| Inria Rocquencourt
| Domaine de Voluceau-Rocquencourt
| B.P.105 78153 Le Chesnay Cedex, FRANCE
| Phone: +33-1 39 63 56 62 Fax: +33-1 39 63 56 74
| Email: [log in to unmask]