DCMI Note on DCMI

Using Dublin Core

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

NOTE: This document was maintained from 2001 to 2005 as an entry point for new users of Dublin Core™ wishing to create simple descriptive records for information resources (for example, electronic documents) and as a ready reference document for specialists. It has been superseded by more recent guidance materials.

The Use of Dublin Core™ Metadata in WebDAV

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

Status of this Memo

This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

The Singapore Framework for Dublin Core™ Application Profiles

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

1. Introduction

The Singapore Framework for Dublin Core™ Application Profiles is a framework for designing metadata applications for maximum interoperability and for documenting such applications for maximum reusability. The framework defines a set of descriptive components that are necessary or useful for documenting an Application Profile and describes how how these documentary standards relate to standard domain models and Semantic Web foundation standards. The framework forms a basis for reviewing Application Profiles for documentary completeness and for conformance with Web-architectural principles.

Representing Peoples Names in Dublin Core

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

This note provides some guidance on representing people's names in metadata.

1. The Problem

While most people only have one name, that name may be written down in many different ways. The name may be written in full (e.g. 'John Stuart Mills'). Components of the name can be abbreviated (e.g. 'John S. Mills', or 'J.S. Mills'), or omitted (e.g. 'John Mills'). Names may be extended by titles or honorifics (e.g. 'Mr. John Mills'). The components of the name may be reordered (e.g. 'Mills, John Stuart'). Complexity is added by the fact that people frequently do not use their 'official' name. People often prefer to use shortened or alternative forms of their name (e.g. 'Kathy' for 'Kathryn', and using 'Jack' for 'John' was once common in Australia). Some people prefer to use their second name instead of their given name (e.g. 'Margaret Read' instead of 'Frances M. Read').

RDF Schema Declaration of Relation Types

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

This document provides an RDF Schema declaration of the Relation Types defined by the Dublin Core™ Relation Type Working Group. This schema declaration consists of both machine-understandable information and human-readable prose for each of the agreed upon Relation Types. The machine-understandable declaration of these types are found embedded in the HTML source code. Human readable declarations of the relation types are as followed:

On Information Factoring in Dublin Metadata Records

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

Dublin Core™ Architecture Working Group: Discussion Note

Status of this Document

This document, first published in 1996, is being made available as a Dublin Core™ discussion note as part of the DC-Architecture Working Group's effort to formalise an XML/RDF representation of the Dublin Core™. While the document is 5 years old, many of the issues and observations made are worth reconsidering in the light of subsequent work on RDF and XML. The DC Note in its current form is UNPUBLISHED and undergoing minor edits for publication on the dublincore.org site. Contact Dan Brickley (dc-architecture co-chair) if you have any queries regarding this process.

Notes on DCMI specifications for expressing Dublin Core™ metadata in RDF

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction
Background
Support for domains and ranges
Support for value strings
Deprecated constructs
Other changes
References

1. Introduction

In January 2008, DCMI released "Expressing Dublin Core™ metadata in the Resource Description Framework (RDF)" as a DCMI Recommendation [DC-RDF]. This Recommendation replaces two legacy DCMI documents:

Names in Dublin Core

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

There has seemed to be an irresistible inclination to incorporate into the Dublin Core™ elements information associated with names that might be useful to users of metadata records. I would like to propose that we adopt instead the general strategy for names that has worked well in libraries for many decades. Libraries store only authorized forms of names in metadata records for library resources--any other information on the name resides in a separate record for the name itself. This avoids just the sort of muddle that we have been struggling with in the DC data model, whereby we find ourselves endlessly arguing about whether a subelement modifies a "real" resource or a name (which may also be a resource in its own right but is nonetheless primarily a name in the context of the "real" resource). Thankfully, RDF supports this kind of structure, so we need not invent some additional box to accomplish our goal.

Dublin Core™ Tags Applied to XML-Data Schemas for Purpose of Description and Categorization

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

The Dublin Core™ Metadata Element Set is a collection of fifteen elements designed by librarians to categorize and catalog documents. The elements are sufficiently general that they are suitable for categorizing and describing XML-Data schemas. This paper proposes a schema, based on Dublin Core™ elements, and then gives guidelines for its application in XML-Data schemas.

Dublin Core™ and z39.50

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

This document is substantially changed from the previous draft. It incorporates changes reflecting the results of the January meeting of the Z39.50 Implementors Group (ZIG).

Domains and Ranges for DCMI Properties

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction
The Classes
Domain and Range assertions for DCMI Properties
References

1. Introduction

This document uses the terminology of the DCMI Abstract Model [DCAM]. The relationship types with which this document is principally concerned are described by the DCAM as follows:

Description and Cataloging of XML-Data Schemas

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

The Dublin Core™ Metatadata Element Set is a collection of fifteen elements designed to categorize and catalog electronic resources. The elements are sufficiently general that they are suitable for categorizing and describing XML-Data schemas. This paper proposes a schema, based on Dublin Core™ elements, and then gives guidelines for its application in XML-Data schemas.

A Syntax for Writing a List of Labelled Values in a Text String

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction
Structured Values - the DCSV scheme
Parsing DCSV
Examples
Sample Code for parsing DCSV coded values
Acknowledgments
References

1. Introduction

Element attributes in markup languages, such as HTML [HTML4] and XML [XML], provide an alternative position to the element content for recording data. For some "empty" elements - such as the <IMG >and <META >elements in HTML - attributes are the only place to hold data. In other cases there may be good reasons to prefer element attributes to element content for data. For example, fragments of XML can be included in the <HEAD>of a HTML document, and will be safely ignored by most client software (eg browsers) provided the elements have no content. This syntax trick can be used to embed XML-RDF encoded data safely in current versions of HTML [RDF-in-HTML].

A Definition of Thesauri and Classification as Indexing Tools

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

This message summarizes the definition of thesauri and classification as indexing tools and gives the distinction between entity (taxonomic) and bibliographic classification. It also explains the difference between thesauri and classification and the difference between the general classification schemes suggested for DCMES element SUBJECT: LCC, DCC and UDC.

A Cross-Domain Attribute Set

Fri, 01 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0000

The Problems with Cross-Domain Searching

Searching is almost always about compromises. The kinds of access points that the searcher is expecting may or may not be accurately reflected in the indexing provided by the database server. The searching is most accurate, and the searcher is least surprised, when the searcher and client software have a complete understanding of the schema of the database being searched. The next least surprising environment is when the searcher has no expectations about the database and the server provides the complete document in a single index (e.g. WAIS). This may not be very accurate, but no one is surprised by the results. Anything in between complete understanding and complete ignorance is a compromise and subject to the user being surprised by the results of a search.

Kernel Metadata

Thu, 14 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0000

Note: This is the experimental draft of a potential DCMI Recommended Resource description. This experimental document provides a landing page for Kernel metadata. It has no official status, has not been publicized, and if found, should not be cited.

DCMI Generic Namespace Policy for RDF Vocabularies

Mon, 02 May 2011 00:00:00 +0000

RDF vocabularies require:

Use of URIs. Each term (e.g., property or class) in an RDF vocabulary must be identified with a URI.
Stable identifiers. Each term URI should refer to the same term in perpetuity and should not be repurposed, sold, or forfeited through neglect (e.g., by non-payment of domain name fees). This commitment should be backed by institutional guarantees. Note that stable URIs (such as PURLs) do not automatically refer to stable documentation (such as content to which PURLs are redirected).
Machine-processable documentation. Each term URI should remain resolvable to a machine-processable expression of its semantics in accordance with principles of Web architecture. As of 2011, such expressions include RDF schemas and OWL ontologies and are documented in forms ranging from stand-alone schema files to formal representations embedded in Web pages.
Change policies. The stability of the meaning of the terms should be determinable -- i.e., the meanings of terms should evolve according to known change management policies and with responsibility for changes traceable to individuals or organizations. Change histories should also be published so that a vocabulary's evolution over time is a matter of public record.
Open access provisions. Vocabularies should be made available for public access under the terms of copyright models that encourage re-use and collaboration and with well-defined mechanisms for community feedback.
Preservation provisions. As for any other artifact of cultural and historical significance, arrangements should be made for the long-term preservation of a vocabulary.

Subscribers to these principles

FOAF Project
Dublin Core™ Metadata Initiative

Interoperability Levels for Dublin Core™ Metadata

Fri, 01 May 2009 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction
Level 1: Shared Term Definitions
Level 2: Formal Semantic Interoperability
Level 3: Description Set Syntactic Interoperability
Level 4: Description Set Profile Interoperability
References
Acknowledgements

Criteria for the Review of Application Profiles

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0000

1. Object of Evaluation

The following guidelines articulate the criteria by which the DCMI Usage Board reviews an Application Profile. As of March 2008, the main points of reference for these review criteria are the Singapore Framework for Dublin Core™ Application Profiles [SINGAPORE-FRAMEWORK], Abstract Model [DC-AM], and a draft Description Set Profile specification [DC-DSP]. Best-practice examples of application profiles include Dublin Core™ Collections Application Profile [DC-CAP], which was reviewed by the Usage Board [DC-CAP-REVIEW], and Eprints Application Profile [EPRINTS].

Notes on DCMI specifications for Dublin Core™ metadata in HTML/XHTML meta and link elements

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction
Background
Comparison between the DC-HTML-2003 and DC-HTML-2008 HTML/XHTML meta data profiles
Recommendations
Recommendations

1. Introduction

In July 2008, DCMI published the document Expressing Dublin Core™ using HTML/XHTML meta and link elements [DC-HTML-2008] as a DCMI Recommendation. It supercedes the previous Recommendation Expressing Dublin Core™ in HTML/XHTML meta and link elements [DC-HTML-2003].

DCMI Note on DCMI

Using Dublin Core

The Use of Dublin Core™ Metadata in WebDAV

The Singapore Framework for Dublin Core™ Application Profiles

1. Introduction

Representing Peoples Names in Dublin Core

RDF Schema Declaration of Relation Types

On Information Factoring in Dublin Metadata Records

Dublin Core™ Architecture Working Group: Discussion Note

Status of this Document

Notes on DCMI specifications for expressing Dublin Core™ metadata in RDF

Table of contents

1. Introduction

Names in Dublin Core

Dublin Core™ Tags Applied to XML-Data Schemas for Purpose of Description and Categorization

Dublin Core™ and z39.50

Domains and Ranges for DCMI Properties

Table of contents

1. Introduction

Description and Cataloging of XML-Data Schemas

A Syntax for Writing a List of Labelled Values in a Text String

1. Introduction

A Definition of Thesauri and Classification as Indexing Tools

A Cross-Domain Attribute Set

Kernel Metadata

DCMI Generic Namespace Policy for RDF Vocabularies

RDF vocabularies require:

Subscribers to these principles

Interoperability Levels for Dublin Core™ Metadata

Table of contents

Criteria for the Review of Application Profiles

1. Object of Evaluation

Notes on DCMI specifications for Dublin Core™ metadata in HTML/XHTML meta and link elements

Table of contents

1. Introduction