- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:32:24 +0100
- To: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>
- Cc: W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
Received on Monday, 10 March 2014 10:32:55 UTC
It may be old news for you, but it is new to me... I have just ran across http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/ http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/modsrdf/ https://github.com/blunalucero/MODS-RDF/ We clearly do not have enough vocabularies to choose from:-) Interestingly, http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-overview.html says: [[[ MODS is intended to complement other metadata formats. For some applications, particularly those that have used MARC records, there will be advantages over other metadata schemes. Some advantages are: • The element set is richer than Dublin Core • The element set is more compatible with library data than ONIX • The schema is more end user oriented than the full MARCXML schema • The element set is simpler than the full MARC format ]]] which would make it highly relevant for this community, too; after all, both ONIX and Dublin Core are widely used by publishers... We should pick up the discussion on whether we want to give some sort of an overview of existing vocabularies. ivan ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Digital Publishing Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 GPG: 0x343F1A3D FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf
Received on Monday, 10 March 2014 10:32:55 UTC