OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

uoml-x message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Updates on using SVG and Dublin Core for UOML next version


TC members,

I have been further investing in some of the open topics for the next 
UOML version.

SVG
---
I have been contacting the SVG WG of the W3C to find out, if we can be 
using a subset of SVG within UOML. The answer was "yes". SVG is indeed 
designed very modular. The SVG WG is strongly promoting using profiles 
of SVG. They are preparing a recommendation for integrating SVG within 
other standards. Please refer:
http://dev.w3.org/SVG/modules/integration/SVGIntegration.html

In SVG 1.1 for example SVG Tiny (also SVG Basic) were not defined in own 
specifications, but were profiles of SVG Full, see:
http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile/

However, if backwards compatibility of UOML 1.1 is still a major 
requirement, we cannot consider SVG this time, as it would mean applying 
significant changes to the UOML schema. Hence, I would recommend to add 
and informative clause to the UOML specification, that explains 
similarities of UOML graphics objects and according SVG elements.

Metadata
--------
I have been reading quite a lot about metadata last week. My 
recommendation would be to add basic Dublin Core support to the UOML 
specification immediately. As the UOML approach to metadata is somehow 
similar to HTML, one alternative is to follow the recommendation 
"Expressing Dublin Core metadata using HTML/XHTML meta and link 
elements": http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-html/
This would look like:
<metalist>
    <meta key="dc:title" val="UOML Part 1 Version 1.1" />
    ...
</metalist>

The other alternative would be to add DC as simple XML according to the 
recommendation "Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core in XML": 
http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-xml-guidelines/
This would mean letting reside DC along side the old metadata:
<metalist>
    <meta key="Custom Key" val="Custom Value" />
    <dc:title>UOML Part 1 Version 1.1</dc:title>
    ...
</metalist>

I don't see any compatibility issues with both approaches. Comments are 
of course welcome.

One of the main advantages to start with Dublin Core now is that it's a 
good entry to support RDF later, which will offer some interesting 
features to express relations of documents within a docset or between 
docsets.

Best regards,
Peter


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]