- From: Kevin Smathers <kevin.smathers@hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 10:17:59 -0700
- To: "Butler, Mark" <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-dspace@w3.org
Butler, Mark wrote: >This paper > >http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april02/weibel/04weibel.html > >Has an interesting taxonomy on the relationship between metadata and >content: > >"C. Association Models >There are various ways to associate metadata with resources: > > > [...] >perhaps we want to introduce the distinction between embedded, associated >and third-party metadata in the document? > > > To what effect? It seems to me that the Dspace taxonomy for data is approximately: Configuration data Website Configuration Data Database connection data Filesystem data Runtime data User and group data Collection hierarchy data Vocabulary data Card catalog data Collected assets data Asset metadata Asset contents History data ABC History chains Card catalog historical instances DSpace event references Even if were to observe each of the types of metadata/data relationships described above in the DSpace data, would it have any effect on how we work with that data? If one is interested in categorizations, wouldn't it help more is to categorize the parts of the data that we would like to represent in RDF, the parts that are more usefully represented in relational databases, and the parts that will have other more specialized characteristics. -- ======================================================== Kevin Smathers kevin.smathers@hp.com Hewlett-Packard kevin@ank.com Palo Alto Research Lab 1501 Page Mill Rd. 650-857-4477 work M/S 1135 650-852-8186 fax Palo Alto, CA 94304 510-247-1031 home ======================================================== use "Standard::Disclaimer"; carp("This message was printed on 100% recycled bits.");
Received on Thursday, 26 June 2003 13:19:12 UTC