Notes from a Skype call, 2010-05-07

Mary: We're starting by taking things out of the current
Glossary. Question: how should be denote legacy terms?
Should we keep them in one list, marked as legacy, or split
them into a separate list?

People working with Level 1 software - are most people.
We need to continue to support those people. New people
coming in still using this. Alot of people we teach are not
catalogers - they are administrators.

Steffi: Simple/Qualified DC?

Mary: Change in terminology, but not dropping support. When I
teach it, this is the original terminology. My question:
take another step back: originally we had all metadata terms
in the glossary (title, date...).

Steffi: We should keep them out of glossary.

Marcia: Agree with Mary - from my teaching, vast majority
still in Level 1. They see how to turn bibliographic into
linked data. From library community: first vocabularies become
linked data, then bibliographic data (Swedish, Hungarian).
Bridge is Dublin Core™. Getty - historical or current.
Indicators can be used.

Don't like "legacy" for things that are still valid,
only older. Implies they are no longer valid. "Historical"
doesn't have the same negative connotation as "legacy".
Or "classic", as in classic / semantic.

Steffi: Local/global is not good.

Mary: We want people to think about what their metadata will
look like outside their context.

Mary: Classic / Semantic / Legacy (warwick, lego).

Tom: "Dublin Core™ style".

Steffi: "Using DC Version 2"? Tell what they will read
and why - didn't change much. Changes in Chaps 1 ("What is
metadata?") and 2 ("What is DC?")

Mary: Software designers need to understand triples.
Others just need to input metadata - add VES, etc - and we
confuse them.

Marcia: "Record" - really talking about Descriptions. What is
the basic unit - Description? Record?

-- - mailing list
-- - wiki 
-- - charter
-- - 2005 glossary
-- - changes proposed by Mary
-- - 2007 dc-tools glossary
-- - Steffi's revision of Using DC
Thomas Baker <[email protected]>