LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  August 2004

ZNG August 2004

Subject:

Re: OAI profile/Metadata scope

From:

"Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Mon, 30 Aug 2004 16:21:25 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (73 lines)

I believe SRW needs a utility index set.

 If we have an index, say, 'identifier', in a utility set, we can
qualify/scope it (see note below) however we want. I don't think we
can/should do that with DC.

An OAI record includes an identifer for the resource it describes. It's
proper to search that identifier as dc.identifier. The oai record itself has
an identifier. I don't think it's proper to cast that as a dc identifier,
scoped or not.

 Right now we represent unqualified DC and I think we represent it
faithfully. If we want to represent a more complex form (i.e. DC qualified)
we'd still want to do so faithfully, I'm sure we'd all agree (and some of us
might even remember the trouble we got into when we tried to take DC into
our own hands with Z39.50, a long time ago, 1997 I think).  Trying to impose
some form of FRBR model would not fit well with DC (someone please correct
me if I'm wrong on this point).

I agree with Rob that we probably should chose a direction here before we go
much further along the lines of an OAI profile.  I suggest (for one) that we
develop a utility index set. I don't think it needs to have alot of indexes,
but 'date' and 'identifier' come to mind, and either of these could be
qualified to meet the oai requirements.  I think we should either leave DC
alone (unqualified), or leave it to the DC community to come up with
qualifiers that would form a qualified DC set.

(Note: some of this conversation has gone on privately and there is a
suggestion to add a new sort of modifer to cql, that would in effect,
qualify an index. It's not a complete proposal at this point.)

--Ray


----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Sanderson" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 2:44 PM
Subject: OAI profile/Metadata scope


> To summarize a clever idea of Jeff Young (OCLC):
>
> If there was a record creation and record identifier index, plus
> optionally an oai.set scannable index and/or an oai_dc recordSchema, you
> could seamlessly expose the SRW database via OAI.
>
> Jeff's original plan was to have oai.identifier, oai.datestamp and
> oai.set, but recently we've talked about dc.identifier with a scope
> of record metadata (as opposed to OAI's use of 'metadata' meaning record)
>
> oai.set isn't contentious, even though the semantics are similar to that
> of cql.resultSetId, as we don't have any defined semantics for scanning
> that special index (among other reasons)
>
> But recently there has also been the discussion regarding dublin core as
> record schema and dublin core as defining semantics for indexes.
>
> It seems like a very good time to make a decision about all of this, such
> that we don't end up with many many context sets all defining something
> called 'title' or some defining 'author', some 'creator', some
> 'personName' etc. etc. multiple times, once at each metadata level they
> can think of.
>
> Rob
>
>        ,'/:.          Dr Robert Sanderson ([log in to unmask])
>      ,'-/::::.        http://www.o-r-g.org/~azaroth/
>    ,'--/::(@)::.      Special Collections and Archives, extension 3142
> ,'---/::::::::::.    University of Liverpool
> ____/:::::::::::::.  L5R Shop: http://www.cardsnotwords.com/
> I L L U M I N A T I

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager