Re: [office-metadata] Editing files post metadata

[Bernd Schuster <schuster@mskgmbh.com>]

Hi Patrick,
thank you for bringing back the discussion on an emotional level on 
which constructive work can be done.
I agreee in what you are saying with one exception:
I propose to differentiate between the use case
1)  of splitting of literals, which are tagged with metadata
and
2) the use case, where a given plugin is missing.

because the handling of a missing plugin is a more general problem which 
applies to many use cases, where content editing interferes with 
metadata concerns.

Given the above use cases, 2 requirements can be defined, which from 
point of view should be added to our proposal

1) The splitting problem must be handled by the editing application in 
that it has first to recognize that some kind of inconsistency is going 
to occur and second it has to generate some kind of software event which 
might be processed by a piece of software (i.e. a plugin).


2) The use case, where a given plugin is missing must be solved by some 
kind of default plugin which is able to handle the software event 
adequately (Of course, one reaction of this default plugin can be 
warning the user. But this, for me, is not in the scope of this 
discussion.).
Maybe the requirement can be formulated like. "The user must be at any 
time aware of what impact his work has, or the application must provide 
mechanisms which ensure, that the consistency of the metatdata is 
guranteed".

Maybe this proposal will help us to go ahead with this subject.



Patrick Durusau schrieb:
> Greetings!
>
> I think, possibly incorrectly, that I understand at least one of the 
> issues that Svante has been trying to raise.
>
> Assume that a user get a file that has already had metadata attached 
> to the content and in the process of editing that file, splits the 
> content that was the marked as having metadata?
>
> I think that is what Svante was suggesting when he said asked about 
> the user that has no metadata plugin and is editing the file.
>
> To some degree I think all the examples that have been discussed 
> presume that metadata is being attached to relatively small snippets 
> of content that are unlikely to be split in later editing.
>
> Note there is no disagreement that we should be using standard RDF or 
> that and RDFa-like mechanism should not be used when applicable.
>
> The question I understand that is being asked by Svante is a more 
> subtle one about post imposition of metadata editing.
>
> I am not entirely sure that there is a solution that can handle every 
> post-imposition of metadata editing issue but I think it is worth 
> discussing. Even if the solution is to simply warn the user that 
> metadata has been attached to the content that is being edited.
>
> Hope everyone is having a great day!
>
> Patrick
>


-- 
mit freundlichem Gruß

Bernd Schuster

MSK Gesellschaft für Automatisierung mbH
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 33
D-22869 Schenefeld

Tel.: +49 40 839286-10
Fax : +49 40 839286-29

eMail: schuster@mskgmbh.com