RE: [stdsreg] Metadata Specification v2.8

[Makx Dekkers <mail@makxdekkers.com>]

In fact, the Dublin Core has the same situation itself:

Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: Reference
Description. Date issued: 1999-07-02
http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/

Dublin Core Metadata Element Set - Reference Description -
Version 1.1. CEN Workshop Agreement CWA 13874:2000. Date published:
2000-03
http://www.cenorm.be/isss/cwa_download_area/cwa13874.pdf

The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set. American National Standard
Z39.85. Date approved: 2001-09-10
http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-85.pdf

The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set. RFC 2413bis. Date posted:
2002-04-15
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-01.txt

All these documents basically contain the same standard, although
there are editorial differences (e.g. different introductory texts).

In this case, I think there would have to be four metadata records,
one for each of the documents, with Relation fields pointing between
them.

Makx.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Makx Dekkers                            e-mail: mail@makxdekkers.com
tel: +352 2636 0150     fax: +352 2636 0151     GSM: +352 021 199910

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Bryan [mailto:mtbryan@sgml.u-net.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 20 August 2002 18:19
> To: 'Standards Registry Mail List'
> Subject: Re: [stdsreg] Metadata Specification v2.8
>
>
>
> Bob asked me to clarify:
>
> > +  How do we handle duplicate designations from the different
> organizations.
> > Martin raised this issue and perhaps can offer some guidance.  This is
> > probably something to be handled in the accompanying usage guidance.
>
> There are many standards that have multiple ownership. For example, most
> JTC1 standards are shared by both ISO and IEC, but in this case they have
> the same number and publication date. Of more importance, is the large set
> of standards published jointly by JTC1 and ITU-T, which have totally
> different numbering schemes and are typically approved on totally
> different
> cycles, so that an ISO 2001 standard can be an ITU-T 2003 standard.
>
> Martin
>
>