Dublin Core citation in RDFa 1.1 Primer - also "unconstrained" properties

The RDFa 1.1 Primer, W3C Editor's Draft 21 October 2011 [1], cites ("[DC11]"):

    Dublin Core metadata initiative. Dublin Core metadata element set, version
    1.1. July 1999. Dublin Core recommendation. URL:
    http://purl.oclc.org/docs/core/documents/rec-dces-19990702.htm 

This is a very old URL -- so old, that it no longer resolves.  The best URLs
to use for Dublin Core are:
    
    http://dublincore.org/documents/2010/10/11/dcmi-terms/ - or 
    http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/ ("latest version")

The specification above documents both the /terms/ namespace for the DC-15 -- with 
their assigned ranges -- and the /elements/1.1/ namespace, which is "unconstrained"
with formal ranges.  The references to Dublin Core in [1] are actually a bit
ambiguous, because the examples show purl.org/dc/terms/, but the reference seems
to intend "version 1.1".

Aside from correcting the citation, I'd like to take the opportunity to ask
again, in light of the changing environment, your current opinions on whether
DCMI should still be "gently promoting" the /terms/ terms, with their formal
ranges and, by implication, gently discouraging the use of unconstrained
/elements/1.1/ terms.

I ask, because we have gotten some feedback from major implementers who find
the "rangeless" properties to be convenient, and we have heard some criticism
about the designation of /elements/1.1/ properties as "legacy" [2].

I see this as a significant question for the Semantic Web community that goes
well beyond DCMI Metadata Terms.  The question is: Given our current
understanding of implementation of RDF vocabularies, and consumption of RDF
data, should we promote properties with domains and ranges, or properties
without?  Does the answer depend on content of use?  Previous discussions on
this list concluded that the RDFa documentation should consistently use /terms/
properties, but is this still the opinion of this group?

Beyond a correction of the citation, I would be very interested in your 
opinions on this point...

Many thanks,
Tom

[1] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-primer/
[2] http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#H3

-- 
Tom Baker <tom@tombaker.org>

Received on Friday, 28 October 2011 23:20:31 UTC