RE: Update to draft-ietf-webdav-dublin-core

Thanks for forwarding your note to the meta2 list. A few comments, which
are my personal opinions and are not to be taken as Dublin Core gospel.
on section 2.1
 The datamodel working group of the Dublin Core has recommended that
 the URI http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.0/ be the one for the XML
 namespace used for the 15 Dublin Core elements. That decision has
 not been ratified by the community as a whole, but it might be better
 to replace the ftp.isi.edu URL with this one.
on section 2.2
 Sounds good, some examples might be nice.
 There are some cases that might need more explanation, dc:Identifier
for
 example. Assume an XML document describes itself with some embedded
DC.
 It is allowed, but not required, to have a dc:Identifier that holds
the
 URI of the XML document. I'm not sure of WebDAV's handling of
implicit
 identifiers, so you may want to say something on this point.
2.3
 The Dublin Core datamaldel WG has been looking into issues of
repetition of
 property values. That working group is making a schema for basic and
for
 qualified Dublin Core using RDF. We are not using <ol><li>... for
lists
 of values, although there is actually a similar syntax IF the
multiple
 values are specified using an RDF collection (Bag, Seq, Alt).
 The problem, however, is that RDF also allows simple repetition, in
addition
 to the collection constructs. Since simple repetition is the simplest
way
 for dealing with multiple creators in simple syntaxes like HTML
<meta> tags,
 the DC commuity expects to see a lot of them.
 So, the datamodel WG has made the interim decision that any of the
RDF
 mechanisms (simple repetition or the collection constructs) are fair
to use
 in Dublin Core. (That group has also sought feedback from
implementors on
 that decision).
 So, while the Dublin Core assumes some capabilities that are more
general
 than WebDAV, there may be a workaround. That could be a point for
discussion
 between the communities.
 However, it is worth noting that the RDF model and syntax WG looked
at the
 question of eliminating simple repetition in favor of requiring
collection
 constructs and decided not to for several reasons.
2.4 Subelements
 The DC commuity has not completed its work on specifying qualifiers.
It has
 reserved another URI for an XML namespace that will hold the
qualifiers it
 does decide to define. So, I would say that it is reasonable
 to deal only with the core 15 elements at this time.
 We can talk about what is going on, in case the WebDAV group wants to
try
 and future-proof WebDAV against what may be coming there. (Generally,
the
 datamodel WG is looking at expressing things in the RDF data model,
getting
 one syntax (XML according to RDF conventions) for free, then looking
at what
 it takes to express the same capabilities in other syntaxes. But,
those other
 syntaxes may be a long time in coming.) 
Just my personal opinions,
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	John Stracke [SMTP:francis@netscape.com]
> Sent:	Tuesday, October 06, 1998 3:27 PM
> To:	WebDAV WG; Meta2 Mailing List
> Subject:	Update to draft-ietf-webdav-dublin-core
> 
> Attached is an update to my Draft on using Dublin Core in
> WebDAV, which addresses the question of subelements
> (currently under debate in the Meta2 group).
> 
> --
> /====================================================================\
> |John (Francis) Stracke |My opinions are my own.|S/MIME supported |
> |Software Retrophrenologist|=========================================|
> |Netscape Comm. Corp. | So what's the gene for belief in |
> |francis@netscape.com | genetic determinism? |
> \====================================================================/
> 
> << File: draft-ietf-webdav-dublin-core-01.txt >>

Received on Thursday, 8 October 1998 13:33:02 UTC

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /