[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Discussion Requested: ODF <dc:creator> conflicts
Hi Dennis, On 04/02/09 02:49, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Wonderful! > > We need to refer to that. It is very important that we refer to that and > not other DCMI documents, because DCMI has removed the XML provision from > its latest DCMI Namespace policy. Well, this document does describe how DCMI should be used within XML, and therefore explains why ODF is using DCMI in the way it is using it. But is this what we should refer to in the ODF specification? Isn't the specification we have to cite here the one that describes the semantics of elements, and isn't this http://www.dublincore.org/documents/dces/ that is, the one we are citing right now? > OK, good. Now we're simply back to discussion on whether the inconsistent > specializations of <dc:creator> are enough of a problem to require remedy in > the ODF specification. DCMI here says that the creator is "An entity primarily responsible for making the resource." ODF 1.2 normatively states "The <dc:creator> element specifies the name of the person who last modified a document (<office:meta>), who created an annotation (<office:annotation>), who authored a change (<office:change-info>)" and we have this note: "Note: The name of this element was chosen for compatibility with Dublin Core metadata, but this definition of "creator" used here differs from Dublin Core, which defines creator as "An entity primarily responsible for making the content of the resource." In OpenDocument terminology, the last person to modify the document is primarily responsible for making the content of the document." First of all, the note is informative only. It states something, but is does not alter any definition we make in the normative text. And it refers only to the first usage of the <dc:creator> element. And it is badly worded, because it suggests that the semantics of dc:creator in ODF differ from the semantics defined by DCMI. The purpose of the note actually is to provide a interpretation of the terms "primarily responsible" and "resource", etc. that fits into the world of editing applications. These applications, regardless whether it is a simple text editor or a complex office applications, just store whole files on a disk or other media. There is no real differentiation between creating a file, modifying it and so on. All these things include a save operation that stores the whole file as last step. Anyway, if we want to provide a clarification, then my suggestion would be to remove the note entirely, and to change the normative text to: "The <dc:creator> element specifies the name of the person who *created the current document instance* (<office:meta>), who created an annotation (<office:annotation>), who authored a change (<office:change-info>)" Best regards Michael -- Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering StarOffice/OpenOffice.org Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55 D-20097 Hamburg, Germany michael.brauer@sun.com http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500 http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]