Print

Print


On Mon, 17 Mar 2003, Roland Schwaenzl wrote:

> > > If some working group is in consense to propose "hasStatus" as a refinement to
> > > "dc:relation" it may propose this - with the documentation needed for that
> > > - to dc:usage
> >
> > Errr... 'hasStatus' is no more a refinement of relation than 'hasDate' or
> > 'hasFormat' (or dc:date and dc:format as we prefer to call them!).  I.e.
> > if hasStatus is a refinement of relation then so is every other DC
> > property.
>
> Andy please clarify:
>
> Are you saying: ""If "hasStatus" is a refinement of dc:relation, then
> all dc-elements refine dc:relation."",
>
> or do you say: """hasStatus" is not a refinement of dc:relation, for
> if it were other inferences would follow you consider as wrong.""

The former.

> I took NO position on the issue itself in the wording you cited,
> just pointed to process.

OK, fine.  I guessed as much... I was just concerned that your message
might give the impression that hasStatus is a valid refinement of
dc:relation.

Andy
--
Distributed Systems, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell       +44 1225 383933
Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/