innovation in metadata design, implementation & best practices

DCMI Usage Board Process Document

Dublin Core Metadata Initiative logo
About the Initiative Documents Working Groups Resources
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative News Tools and Software Projects AskDCMI
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
HomeUsage > Documents > Process > 
 
  </form>
</td>


Title:

DCMI Usage Board (UB) Administrative Processes (Part 6 only!)

Creator:
Diane I. Hillmann, dih1@cornell.edu
Stuart A. Sutton, sasutton@u.washington.edu
Date Issued:
2003-02-07
Identifier:
Replaces:
Is Replaced By:
Not Applicable
Latest version:
Description of document:

This document describes the process by which the DCMI Usage Board reaches decisions on terms and application profiles, as well as its process for managing the registration of encoding schemes.


6. Proposals for Registration of Application Profiles [top]

6.1. Sources of proposals

6.1.1. DCMI working groups

6.1.1.1. Existing working groups
6.1.1.2. Working groups established for the purpose of developing proposals
6.1.2. Metadata implementers
6.1.3. UB itself
6.2. For the purposes of review by the Usage Board:

6.2.1. The Usage Board is interested in reviewing application profiles that make substantial use of Dublin Core elements. The review of application profiles by the Usage Board serves to: 6.2.1.1. analyze the usage of Dublin Core within significant implementations;
6.2.1.2. assign a DCMI stamp of approval;
6.2.1.3. promote the sharing of application profiles between communities; and
6.2.1.4. identify new terms as candidates for inclusion in DCMI namespaces.

6.2.2. Application profiles must provide, for each term, an identifier of the element set where it is defined, ideally in the form of URIs for individual terms.
6.2.3. If the terms in an application profile describe anything other than generic "resources" (the typical domain of Dublin Core), the application profile must make this clear. This is particularly important if an application profile is based on a data model that describes multiple classes of resources, such as agents or collections.
6.2.4. It is recommended that application profiles be prepared using previously reviewed application profiles as models for their layout, appearance, and content. Aside from the required term and element set identifiers, there are no particular constraints on the types of documentation -- local definitions, comments, constraints, or technical notes -- that may be associated with a term.
6.2.5. Each application profile must provide, or point to, a short text that describes:

6.2.5.1. The context and purposes in which the application profile is used or is likely to be used.
6.2.5.2. The organizations or individuals involved in its development and a capsule history thereof.
6.2.5.3. Any arrangements, policies, or intentions regarding the future development and maintenance of the application profile.
6.3. Review of Application Profiles by the Usage Board

6.3.1. An application profile is "well-formed" if it is presented in accordance with the broad and flexible requirements outlined above. These presentation requirements may become more specific as "good practice" emerges over time.
6.3.2. Usage Board review focuses on the use of terms related to Dublin Core terms and on any data models that provide a context for those terms. The Usage Board is agnostic about the use of terms not directly related to Dublin Core; strictly speaking such terms are outside the scope of Usage Board review.
6.3.3. The use of terms related to Dublin Core (such as refinements of Dublin Core elements, or Dublin Core elements that have been constrained for particular contexts) will be evaluated from the standpoint of semantic conformance, grammatical principle (eg, "dumb-down"), clarity, and good practice.
6.4. Publication and use of Usage Board Reviews

6.4.1. An application profiles that "pass" review will be assigned the status of 'conforming'.
6.4.2. For application profiles that "pass" review, the Usage Board will publish a Review on a Web page for application profiles.
6.4.3. Each Review will include, at a minimum:

6.4.3.1. Any comments from the Usage Board on the application profile.
6.4.3.2. Pointers to locally archived copies of the application profile as originally submitted and (if necessary) as subsequently amended in light of Usage Board comments.
6.4.3.3. A pointer to the "latest version" of an application profile held by its maintainers.
6.5. Review represents a form of recognition, and its URL will be persistent for purposes of citation.