W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-gld-wg@w3.org > March 2013

Re: Feedback on LD glossary

From: Bernadette Hyland <bhyland@3roundstones.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 09:53:14 -0400
Cc: public-gld-wg@w3.org, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <29557D57-6B9D-43CB-9123-DB514A5A74D0@3roundstones.com>
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Thanks, I'll include Tom Baker in the outreach as he is definitely a "DCMI person" :-) and overall great LD advocate & practitioner.

Cheers,
Bernadette


On Mar 20, 2013, at 6:21 AM, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote:

> On 19 Mar 2013, at 22:55, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I tend to think of DC Elements as referring to 1.0 and DC Terms to
>>>> 1.1. Certainly the page you link to is called "dmci-terms".
>>>> 
>>>> Suggest s/Element Set/Metadata Terms/ in both title and body.
>>> 
>>> Good catch.  How about we just stick with the core 15 terms widely used.
>>> Are you OK with this?
>> 
>> I would prefer to refer to "Dublin Core Metadata Terms". There has been a preference for using DCT rather than old DC elements in all the public sector I've been involved in for some years.
>> 
>> However, I'm not a DCMI person, presumably there's others in the group better placed to advise on correct terminology.
> 
> I'm not a DCMI person either, but remember seeing a statement from DCMI that discourages use of the old namespace. I agree that we should refer to the new namespace, and agree to Dave's proposed change.
> 
> Richard
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 13:53:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:32:38 UTC