[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj-comment] ISSUE 10 - PSIs "name" "subject" and"description"
Lots of things here. Let's see if I can disentangle myself. At 16:01 24/04/02 +0000, Murray Altheim wrote: >You hit it on the nose. The PSI is in *topic map terms*. The only >reason to use Dublin Core at all is to hook into the DC semantics, >to allow non-TM tools a chance to play in the TM sandbox. I agree in principle that we should hook into the DC semantics as much as possible, but I don't yet have a clear idea exactly how that might be leveraged in practice. I think I need concrete examples. > From the DC element "subject": > > Name: Subject and Keywords > > Identifier: Subject > > Definition: The topic of the content of the resource. > > Comment: Typically, a Subject will be expressed as keywords, > > key phrases or classification codes that describe a topic > > of the resource. > > Recommended best practice is to select a value from a > > controlled vocabulary or formal classification scheme. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >The key here is "controlled vocabulary." If we're defining things >in a PSI set, it might be a good idea to connect it via an existing >controlled vocabulary, such as one found in a library system. Any >tools that are DC element set aware would "understand" the dc:subject >as such and process accordingly. It seems a shame to go to all the >trouble to make XTM/PSI sets ISO 11179 compliant and then leave out >dc:subject. Or maybe I'm getting this all wrong. To be honest I didn't know we were going to "all the trouble to make XTM/PSI sets ISO 11179 compliant". I know next to nothing about ISO 11179 (probably shouldn't admit that in public :) It's not that I doubt you're right, but could you explain? However, that's a side issue. My real problem is that I simply don't understand how you think we would use dc:subject. That's why I asked what a typical value might be. Let me try and make it easier for you to help me. In the following example of a piece of text used as a PSI and employing DC semantics, what might go in the spot marked "*****"? Title: Norway Description: Country in the Scandinavian peninsula bordering on Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Identifier: http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/country.xtm#no Subject: ***** >Now, OTOH, I did a preliminary PSI set for DC last year (I think it >is included in that pile of stuff I posted to this group) which >created PSIs for each of the DC elements. Then, an author could >scope a base name with the dc:subject PSI. That's how I'd planned >to use it, though there certainly may be better ways. Well, that's fine, but now you're talking about the author of a topic map, right, not the author (or publisher) of a PSI set, most of whom probably *won't* use topic maps to express the PSI set. It leads back to the same question: What are the semantics (or purpose) of a dc:subject property attached to a PSI? Steve -- Steve Pepper, Chief Executive Officer <pepper@ontopia.net> Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34/WG3 Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps) Ontopia AS, Waldemar Thranes gt. 98, N-0175 Oslo, Norway. http://www.ontopia.net/ phone: +47-23233080 GSM: +47-90827246
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC