W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > March to April 1997

Re: We need a META schema registry!

From: Andreas Koenig <k@anna.in-berlin.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 06:51:47 +0100
Message-Id: <199703180551.GAA07573@anna.in-berlin.de>
To: advax@triumf.ca
CC: meta2@mrrl.lut.ac.uk, www-talk@w3.org, se-dev@franz.ww.tu-berlin.de
>>>>> Andrew Daviel writes:

 andrew> The Web needs a Metadata registry, IMO.
 andrew> In HTML, many organisations and individuals are starting to generate
 andrew> Metadata using the META tag without any agreement as to what the
 andrew> data means. While I applaud the effort to generate useful metadata,
 andrew> a proliferation of unregistered types is going to dilute its utility 
 andrew> greatly.

The META tag _is_ the disease you're trying to cure.

 andrew> Given that many organisations will want to use private metadata, and that
 andrew> particular disciplines have their own metadata, a single global repository of
 andrew> all metadata types is clearly unworkable. 

 andrew> Proposal:
 andrew> That a top-level registry be set up at an institution such as W3.org,
 andrew> which would maintain a list of top-level schemas.

Even with the best and most diligent registration authority, the META
tag is a two edged sword. It transports stuff nobody is asking for
explicitly. It steals the net bandwidth. Please read
http://www.kulturbox.de/aid/pics-se/ for a proposal how the net can be
freed from this exacerbating bloat today.

[...]

 andrew> The schemas DC (Dublin Core), MCF (Meta Content Format) etc.
 andrew> would be registered with the top-level registry. The organisation
 andrew> registering the schema would be responsible for documenting it.

URLs do have a registration authority already.

 andrew> Anyone using a registered schema would hopefully have read the
 andrew> documentation first.

Amen.

Regards,
andreas
Received on Tuesday, 18 March 1997 00:51:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:22 GMT