[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-metadata] notes on RDF profiling
On Aug 23, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > There's one problem that we at the bibliographic would definitely need > to get around, though, which is that author lists and such are > ordered, while the RDF model is not. This would take some thought > about how best to handle, but one suggestion that I'm liking from Ian > Davis is that one allow a position or order property (which is how > you'd do it in a relational database). Come to think of it, in terms of requirements, I guess we might think of these questions: 1) Do we need to allow one metadata description to reference another? 2) Do we need to allow arbitrary extension (which includes 1)? 3) Do we need to allow merging of ODF metadata? I put the questions this way because I think the unordered nature of the RDF model is necessary to enable 3 (but probably not 1 and 2). If you have two descriptions for the same thing, for example: <rdf:Description rdf:about="urn:x:1"> <dc:title xml:lang="en">A Title</dc:title> </rdf:Description> ... and: <rdf:Description rdf:about="urn:x:1"> <dc:title xml:lang="es">Un Titulo</dc:title> </rdf:Description> ... and you need to merge the descriptions, it becomes arguably impossible to do if order is significant. My answer to the above three requirements questions is "yes". While I could imagine a circumstance where we say "no" to #3, I actually think that would likely introduce more problems than it would solve (it would admittedly solve my problem with order above). Still, something to consider. Bruce
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]