[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [uoml-x] Updates on using SVG and Dublin Core for UOML next version
Hi, if needed I could prepare a proposal until then. Peter On 12.05.2011 20:42, Y. Allison Shi wrote: > Hi All, > > I think we should consider Peter's suggestion about Dublin Core. May be > we can add a discussion about it to our next TC meeting. > > Best rgds, > Allison > > 2011/5/10 Peter Junge <peter.junge@gmx.org <mailto:peter.junge@gmx.org>> > > 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]