innovation in metadata design, implementation & best practices

Topic: Using Dublin Core
Identifier: http://dublincore.org/usage/meetings/2005/05/washdc/topic-userguide/
See also: http://dublincore.org/usage/meetings/2005/05/washdc/
Created: 2005-05-12
Modified: 2005-05-16 17:28, Monday
Maintainer: Tom Baker

For Washington, we should review several revised pages of
"Using Dublin Core":

-- http://content.nsdl.org/dcub/1._Intro_rev.html
-- http://content.nsdl.org/dcub/4._Elements_rev.html
-- http://content.nsdl.org/dcub/5._Qualifiers_rev.html

Diane writes: "Lots of the changes are cosmetic or editorial,
and don't warrant any discussion. I took out some old stuff,
like references to our abandoned vocabulary registration
processes, and added to the already-present notations on
Audience as the 16th element, to Audience, Provenance and
RightsHolder as the additional elements not part of the
original 15 of Simple DC.

"I also revised the piece of RightsHolder guidance that we
discussed on the call, and I'd like some eyeballs to review.
I also added a bit on the Abstract Model in section 2, which
I think ought to be looked at.

"In general, I think it would be great if folks could try and
look at the document with new-ish eyes, so we can discuss
whether this is still a good "entry point" for users.
I'm particularly concerned that we have been building up
a large amount of technical rich technical documentation,
which is referenced in Using Dublin Core, but not necessarily
integrated very well. Is this still okay? Is there a
need for some middle ground--more technical than what we
have already, but still not off-putting for the non-techie?
Is that possible?

"Another question is the relationship of this documentation to
the newly emerging DLF OAI Best Practices documentation (see:
http: //oai-best.comm.nsdl.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?TableOfContents)
which I've been involved with, which includes a lot of
references to DC, as well as other formats. Do we want to
link to that, include some of it in ours, ignore it, what?"