Dear all,
Here are the minutes of the meeting of the working group at DC-7 in
Frankfurt. Please get back to me with corrections or comments by
November 30.
I have copied this message to meeting participants who may not yet be
on the dc-international mailing list (to join, see
http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/dc-international/ or send me email).
Best regards,
Tom
-------------------------------------------------------
DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT - DRAFT
-------------------------------------------------------
Meeting of the
Working Group for Dublin Core
in Multiple Languages
The 7th Dublin Core Metadata Workshop
Die Deutsche Bibliothek, Frankfurt
Tuesday, 26 October 1999
DRAFT FOR COMMENTS
Date prepared: 17 November 1999
Convenor:
Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]>
Present:
Miroslav Bartosek <[log in to unmask]>
Olga Barysheva <[log in to unmask]>
Hans Becker <[log in to unmask]>
Amine Bensaid <[log in to unmask]>
Jose Borbinha <[log in to unmask]>
Ian Campbell-Grant <[log in to unmask]>
Hsueh-hua Chen <[log in to unmask]>
Eric Childress <[log in to unmask]>
Robina Clayphan <[log in to unmask]>
Yuri Demchenko <[log in to unmask]>
Edward Fox <[log in to unmask]>
Stefan Gradmann <[log in to unmask]>
Hisakazu Hada <[log in to unmask]>
Hachim Haddouti <[log in to unmask]>
Knut Hegna <[log in to unmask]>
Noriko Kando <[log in to unmask]>
Sarantos Kapidakis <[log in to unmask]>
Sung Hyuk Kim <[log in to unmask]>
Mitsuharu Nagamori <[log in to unmask]>
Jagtar Singh <[log in to unmask]>
Shigeo Sugimoto <[log in to unmask]>
Hanna Voskresenska <[log in to unmask]>
Anne-Marie Vercoustre <[log in to unmask]>
Other guests:
Mohamad El-Saadi <[log in to unmask]>
Overview:
Tom Baker summarized activities of the Working Group for Dublin Core in
Multiple Languages (DC-ML) over the past two years [1]. A position
paper discussed in 1998 has led to the development of a prototype
RDF-based registry of Dublin Core schemas in multiple languages and a
formal proposal for a registry for DCMI [2,3].
Discussion focused on how the Working Group should proceed (as a
Working Group or Interest Group); on the registry proposal and related
issues such as versioning; and on the identification of work items.
Group decisions were presented the following day to the Workshop as a
whole [4].
Issues and decisions:
1) Working Group or Interest Group?
In the DCMI context, Working Groups are constituted for the
purpose of carrying out work plans (e.g., to produce technical
or policy documents); Interest Groups, in contrast, are formed
around ongoing issues of interest and may or may not have
specific technical deliverables.
We decided to change the status of DC-ML to that of an Interest
Group, even though several deliverables were defined (see below).
The new name of the group would be Interest Group for Dublin
Core in Multiple Languages.
Jose Borbinha will join Tom Baker as a co-host to the mailing
list.
Deliverable: Note to DC Directorate on DC-ML status
Due date: Soon.
Action: Tom Baker, Jose Borbinha
2) Internationalization (I18N) issues
Until now, the scope of DC-ML has been "Dublin Core schemas
(i.e., semantics) in multiple languages" and not technical
issues of I18N per se (e.g., character encoding sets and
transliteration policies). It was decided to broaden this
scope by developing an I18N framework for DCMI.
Deliverable: I18N Framework for Dublin Core
Due date: Sometime before the next DC workshop
Action: Yuri Demchenko, Shigeo Sugimoto, Hachim Haddouti
3) Formal recognition and standardization
The DCMI currently has no procedure for evaluating or giving
official recognition to DC schemas in other languages. It was
decided to constitute a committee to examine the relevant
issues and develop recommendations. Relevant questions
include: Should official versions of Dublin Core elements and
qualifiers reside at the DCMI Web site or on national servers?
What is the role of other national or regional standardization
authorities? Should each country or language have an official
designated maintenance agency? How could the DCMI review the
candidate agencies and DC schemas for quality and institutional
commitment? What tasks should such agencies be expected to
undertake?
Deliverable: Recommendations on formal recognition and standardization
Due date: Sometime before the next DC workshop.
Action: Hans Becker, Amine Bensaid, Olga Barysheva
4) Survey of Dublin Core usage in multiple languages
Through email, Tom Baker has kept track of Dublin-Core-related
activities (especially schema development) in many countries,
but there is a need now for a more structured and detailed
survey of activities, policies, and applications (perhaps with
examples). This survey can provide important input and feedback
to the implementers of the DCMI registry.
Deliverable: Survey of Dublin Core usage in multiple languages
Due date: Sometime in the next few months
Action: Yuri Demchenko, Hans Becker
5) A Registry for Dublin Core elements and qualifiers
A proposal is under discussion in the DCMI for an RDF-based
registry of Dublin Core elements and qualifiers [3]; Shigeo
Sugimoto and Mitsuharu Nagamori of ULIS are working on a
prototype interface [2]; Eric Miller is working on basic
software tools for handling RDF schemas [5]; Tom Baker, Makx
Dekkers, and Rachel Heery will work on related issues in an
EU-funded project, SCHEMAS; and Hans Becker has an ongoing related
project, MetaForm [6]. Discussion of the registry proposal
began in the Advisory Committee but will continue in a new
Registry Working Group. Policy and software development will
be discussed as two related but separate issues.
Deliverable: Proposal for a Registry Working Group
Due date: Soon.
Action: Tom Baker
6) Other issues for discussion on the mailing list
a) Tom Baker summarized alternative ways under discussion for
versioning Dublin Core elements and qualifiers [1]. These
alternatives all have implications for the nature of DC-ML
activities. The Advisory Committee will formally select one of
these alternatives within the next few months. Tom will
inform the DC-ML mailing list about the status of the versioning
proposal to the AC.
b) We do not have a consistent and intuitively understandable
vocabulary for talking about Dublin Core elements and qualifiers
in languages other than English. When are they translations,
versions, instantiations, or manifestations? [7]
c) Should the shared tokens for global DCMI elements and qualifiers
embedded in metadata records resemble English words,
pronouncable strings, or merely numbers? Why does it matter?
References
[1] http://www.ddb.de/partner/dc7conference/results/dc7-ml2.index.htm
[2] http://mhtml.ulis.ac.jp/~nagamori/DCML/
[3] http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/dc-international/1999-10/0000.html
[4] http://www.ddb.de/partner/dc7conference/results/dc7-ml1.index.htm
[5] http://rdf.dev.oclc.org/myrdf/
[6] http://www2.sub.uni-goettingen.de/metaform
[7] http://www.dlib.org/dlib/december98/12baker.html
_______________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Thomas Baker [log in to unmask]
GMD Library
Schloss Birlinghoven +49-2241-14-2352
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-14-2619
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|