W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Library data diagram

From: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 10:30:03 -0400
To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Cc: public-lld@w3.org
Message-ID: <20100901143003.GA2744@octavius>
Thank you, Emmanuelle, for drawing up the comparative 
diagrams [1] and thank you, Karen, for getting the ball
rolling on discussion.

A comment specifically on Singapore Framework [2]...

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:38:36PM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote:
> The Singapore Framework places guidance rules outside of the flow of  
> vocabulary and DCAP development. This makes me think that in SF the  
> guidance rules are developed and applied after the other steps toward  
> an application profile have taken place. 

As I see it, the SF diagram is intended to show how the
components of an "application profile" relate to each other
and to underlying foundational standards (RDF).

The diagram does also suggest a workflow, and I too like to
present it this way -- starting with Functional Requirements,
through defining a Domain Model, specifying a Description Set
Profile and, finally, creator a Data Format, with the designer
"dipping down" one level to create new or cite existing domain
models and vocabularies.  And as a rough approximation, this
seems like a reasonable way to proceed as long as it is not
applied too mechanically.  In the end, though, SF is meant
to depict less a specific sequence of tasks than a picture of
how things relate.

>                                          This is accurate in terms of  
> Dublin Core metadata, which was developed initially without actual  
> guidance rules.
> In Emmanuelle's diagram of library metadata, the guidance rules appear  
> to precede the vocabulary. This is accurate in terms of library  
> metadata, in which the vocabularies arise from the guidance rules.
> These two models, DC and libraries, seem to me to be the extremes of  
> the development continuum. In libraries the guidance rules are the  
> most important aspect of the metadata creation activity, and in Dublin  
> Core they can almost be considered unnecessary. 

If for libraries, guidance rules are the point of departure for
metadata design, then "support for guidance rules" would quite
simply need to be defined as a key functional requirement.

If this is done, then the metadata creation workflow in
libraries can be seen as fitting both the Singapore Framework
view and its implied workflow (which starts with Functional
Requirements) -- only that, in this case, the functional
requirements may be unusually heavy on existing guidance


[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/File:LayeredModelV3.pdf
[2] http://dublincore.org/documents/singapore-framework/

Tom Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Received on Wednesday, 1 September 2010 14:30:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:27:37 UTC