RE: Namespace evolution.

I just found this document, "Using Dublin Core in XML" [1], also a Working
Draft but much more recent, that uses as
the namespace. Thanks in advance to everyone who was going to point that
out. I still don't like the fact that it's version dependant.



> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of Jason Diamond
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2000 12:32 AM
> To:
> Subject: Namespace evolution.
> Hi.
> I'm confused. Again.
> The Dublin Core site contains a working draft entitled "Guidance on
> expressing the Dublin Core within the Resource Description Framework" [1].
> In it, the suggested namespace for the 15 DC properties is
> I recently came across an RDF file that claimed the namespace was
> I thought it was a typo at
> first but just
> to confirm that it was before making myself look stupid (too
> late), I tried
> retrieving the URL. Not only did it work (how cool is that?) but it also
> informed me of the existence of DC 1.1. Of course, it's been out
> for over a
> year and [1] is only a WD (also over a year old) but I was shocked to
> discover that the web's most prevalent metadata "schema" and one
> of the few
> real reasons to actually use RDF isn't even trying to be RDF-friendly.
> What I mean by that basically boils down to this: If properties
> are uniquely
> identified by the concatenation of their namespace and element/attribute
> name as specified in the RDF M&S, how are we supposed to know that
> ==
> Does the DC plan on releasing version 1.2 or higher? Shouldn't a version
> agnostic namespace be used for RDF purposes in case they do? (How about
> After all, both versions
> contain the exact
> same elements.) Why hasn't [1] been finalized? If I quit bitching
> about why
> nothing gets done and did it myself, would anybody listen? Or would they
> just redo it later?
> Speaking of namespace equivalency, a recent discussion on RSS-DEV
> [2] brings
> up the question of how we might be able to tell when two or more
> properties
> are "equivalent". Could an rdfs:isEquivalentTo (or such) core property be
> added to RDF Schema before it's recommendation? Or do we expect
> everybody to
> agree on their URI vocabularies?
> Jason.
> [1]
> [2]

Received on Monday, 16 October 2000 04:01:21 UTC