Metadata schemas

Hi all,

To help my own understanding of the relevant schemas, I've mapped out 
the IMS and OCW schemas as UML, which I've attached to this e-mail.  The 
IMS diagram is taken from the RDF mapping of the IMS schema, which is 
basically LOM translated into RDF with some funky bits (I'm not sure I 
like the author's tendency to use namespaces as first-class bits of the 
schema definition).  The OCW schema is just a straight forward mapping 
of the XML metadata in our repository.

Missing from the IMS schema is any reference to keywords.  The RDF 
mapping document mentions keywords but simply suggests that the 
dublin-core subject property be used to represent keywords.  This isn't 
mentioned in the schema since the schema uses namespaces to represent 
the relevant class and dc:subject isn't within the namespace.  The same 
goes for description and for several other properties unfortunately.

In thinking over keywords and thus vocabularies I thought a more 
expressive form of subject was needed to represent the navigation 
relationship between keywords since many vocabularies are structured 
into hierarchies of related terms.  The third attachment is a tentative 
model of a Keyword class that would model hierarchical relationships 
among keywords to support vocabularies like the Getty AAT.

(If anyone wants the source files, they are in CVS under 
corpus/ims/OCW.  The UML diagrams were created using the open source 
'dia' tool.)

Cheers,
-kls

-- 
========================================================
   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.");