So why don't we take the leap to RDF instead of MODS or MADS? Do you already have an RDF structure worked out? - Barbara
>>> [log in to unmask] 11/22/05 11:30 AM >>>
On 11/22/05, James Howison <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Seems to me that authors should make their own MADS records
> available ... is there a harvesting system (a la OAI metadata
Except no communtiy but the library communiy will ever use MADS, and
library cataloging only covers one part of the citation universe.
Journal and other periodical publishers are the other huge chunk, and
a lot of those people (Nature, Ingenta, BioMedCentral, etc.) are
working with RDF, and targetted vocabularies lke FOAF. As hard a sell
as RDF is sometimes, I actually think it's easier than MODS and MADS.
I do think in your example, though, the solution is actually not that
coplicated; just encode the nickname directly in the given name
element. I'm more concerned about the examples where one must also
include, say, the original Mandarin (or whatever).
And yes, you could embed MADS (or additional MODS structures) in the
extension element, but isn't that a hack?