W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-zig@w3.org > March 2003

Re: requesting XML records

From: Theo van Veen <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 16:39:22 +0100
Message-Id: <se81d7ca.089@mail.kb.nl>
To: <www-zig@w3.org>

How many DC-brief schemas and how many DC-full schemas do we need.? What is the difference between DC and DC-full. When I ask for DC, do I get DC-full or DC-brief. What if a server only supports DC and I ask for DC-brief? Do I get an error message or the server's best choice? Some do not accept "DC" but require  the URI: http://www.loc.gov/zing/srw/dcschema/v1.0/ .
Others use http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ for requesting DC. And in OAI DC is compulsary and it is called oai_dc, but is is just dc.
Is there a schema that allows me to say: "I prefer DC-brief, but I do understand qualified DC-full and I will not crash when there are a few elements from other namespaces"?

We introduce more and more incompatibility by overstructuring things in a non-functional way. Maybe it is time for a change. 

Theo 



>>> Ray Denenberg <rden@loc.gov> 26-03-03 16:12 >>>

joe_zeeman@notes.rlg.org wrote:

> But the version 2 way of doing it is still wrong, because the XML
> DTD/schema is NOT an element set name.  I want to be able to say both "I
> want a Dublin Core record in XML" and "I want a brief record".  The two are
> not mutually exclusive.  Version 2 does not provide a mechanism to say the
> 3 things we want to say:  XML AND Dublin Core AND Brief.

Joe -- Although we continue to maintain the clear distinction between syntax and
schema, we decided (also at the Dublin meeting --  maybe you were "out of the
room"?) not to perpetuate the distinction between schema and element set name, for
xml. Thus "DC-full" and "DC brief" would be two schemas.  This was the consensus at
Dublin.

--Ray
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2003 10:41:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 29 October 2009 06:12:23 GMT