Re: type & format

My frustration with these is that there is an implicit differentiation between
content and metadata. The world of DC is really about decorating "content-like
resources" with a set of metadata. What is the "format" of a literal? What is
the format of a sub-tree of a decomposed document (i.e. a Word doc decomposed
into a graph)?

When I see an arc, I think "type," made unambiguous by specification somewhere
at the other end of a resolvable qName. That could be what we call "format"
(including functional interpretation) or simply "author" as a literal.

Maybe my mistake is demanding that our terminology be generally applicable.

> Element Name: Type
> Label: Resource Type
> Definition: The nature or genre of the content of the resource.
> Comment: Type includes terms describing general categories, functions,
> genres, or aggregation levels for content. Recommended best practice is
> to select a value from a controlled vocabulary (for example, the DCMI
> Type Vocabulary [DCT1]). To describe the physical or digital
> manifestation of the resource, use the FORMAT element.
>
> Element Name: Format
> Label: Format
> Definition: The physical or digital manifestation of the resource.
> Comment: Typically, Format may include the media-type or dimensions of
> the resource. Format may be used to identify the software, hardware, or
> other equipment needed to display or operate the resource. Examples of
> dimensions include size and duration. Recommended best practice is to
> select a value from a controlled vocabulary (for example, the list of
> Internet Media Types [MIME] defining computer media formats).
>
> --
> eric miller                              http://www.w3.org/people/em/
> semantic web activity lead               http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/
> w3c world wide web consortium            http://www.w3.org/
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 9 April 2003 13:53:11 UTC