- From: Robert Sanderson <azaroth@liverpool.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 19:17:55 +0100 (BST)
- To: Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>
- cc: <www-zig@w3.org>
> > I have two suggestions:
> > A) Related or Cited resource titles should be semantic qualifiers of the
> > Relation DC element which is described as 'A reference to a related
> > resource' and ignore the recommended best practice of using a formal
> > identifier.
> >
> > B) Divorce the Cross Domain attribute set from Dublin Core with respect
> > to all occurences of 'of the resource' and replace with 'related to the
> > resource'. This then allows geographic referent to come under coverage,
> > and related titles to come under title, and date to be used in a 'full
> > text' style attribute set where the date is in the text, not to do with
> > the physical entity or creation of the text.
> B) does not sound like a good approach to me.
Then would you agree with A) and ignore that Relation should be a
controlled vocabulary, or do you have another suggestion? The DC Citation
group currently recommend Identifier, though this is less of a solution in
this case as the full reference for the article (etc) is not given.
I assume that you disagree with B because of your involvement with DC, as
no other explanation is given? Or is there some other reason that XD
shouldn't differ somewhat from DC in regards to scope?
Rob
--
,'/:. Rob Sanderson (azaroth@liverpool.ac.uk)
,'-/::::. http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
,'--/::(@)::. Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
,'---/::::::::::. Syrinnia: telnet: syrinnia.o-r-g.org 7777
____/:::::::::::::. WWW: http://syrinnia.o-r-g.org:8000/
I L L U M I N A T I
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2001 14:22:09 UTC