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

Re: requesting XML records

From: Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:17:58 GMT
Message-Id: <200303271217.h2RCHwH15744@badger.miketaylor.org.uk>
To: Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl
CC: a.powell@ukoln.ac.uk, www-zig@w3.org

> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 12:52:35 +0100
> From: "Theo van Veen" <Theo.vanVeen@kb.nl>
>>> We defined an application profile that we encourage to be used for
>>> optimal functionality.  But we accept DC simple, we prefer to get
>>> DC qualified and we ackowledge the fact that some use the library
>>> application profile. Currently I do not know a descent way of
>>> requesting records in conformance with what I described.
>> Yes.  I agree this is an issue.  What I think you want to do is
>> request a metadata record that conforms to any 'application
>> profile' that is based on 'simple DC'.

I think this is a good articulation of Theo's problem, and I'd like
Theo either to confirm this, or explain why I am wrong.  If we can all
agree that this is what you really want to say, Theo, then we have a
better chance of actually solving your problem.

(Background for those who are not on the ZNG list: we've had much the
same discussion with Theo on that list, and the rather depressing
conclusion seemed to be that Theo wanted to ask for "records that are
either in schema A or 'reasonably close'", which of course is not
something you can ask a computer to judge.  If it turns out that
"based on simple DC" is an adequate paraphrase for Theo's needs, we
may have some mileage after all.)

>> I agree that we have no way of making such a request currently (nor
>> does the OAI-PMH) - but I also agree that it would be useful to
>> have such a mechanism.


> I think we only need one thing to make this happen: reserve the term
> DCX (Dublin Core extended) to express the fact that records -
> requested or returned - are based on DC and DCQ, but may also
> contain elements from other namespaces.

Leaving aside for the moment that these short names have no meanings,
I would strongly oppose this special-case "solution" when we have
there the opportunity to define a simple, flexible, expressive and
comprehensive notion of what we mean by "compatible" or "derived"
schemas, and when a client is prepared to accept them.  Let's fix this
properly, not just by slapping a band-aid over it.

 _/|_	 _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <mike@indexdata.com>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  Everything is not lost.  It's probably just down the back
	 of the sofa.

Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
Received on Thursday, 27 March 2003 07:18:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:05 UTC