We (KB, European Library) are using the name DCX already for 5 years for
DC plus "arbitrary" metadata elements. So I have strong objections
against using this name for DC+RMD. My proposal for a name for DC plus
record metadata would be DC_REC, DC_RMD, DC_R, DCR or DC+REC or whatever
but no DCX. I have been discussing the concept of the DCX recordschema
already 5 years ago on this list. I would not consider it appropriate to
use exactly that name for a new recordSchema.
Van: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Namens Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
Verzonden: woensdag 2 april 2008 23:05
Aan: [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: SRU Record Metadata and DCX Schema (was: Price information in
In response to the recent discussion about including price information
within a DC record, there is now a DCX schema,
which is the DC schema extended to allow record metadata from the record
The elements are defined in the record metadata schema:
(This is a revision of the old record metadata schema that we created
several years ago.)
So you can create a record like this:
<dc:title>To Slide or Not to Slide</dc:title>
(Note that the rmd:creator is the creator of the record, and so differs
dc:creator which is the creator of the object being described by the DC
The intent is not to allow arbitrary record metadata, only metadata from
rmd namespace, and so if there are additional record metadata elements
people think are useful for SRU applications we can add them.
It was suggested in the earlier discussion that if we create a schema
allows external elements, call it DCX. However if people now use DCX to
mean DC along with arbitrary metadata elements not in the DC namespace
not necessarily limited to the rmd namespace, then speak up and we will
up with a name different than DCX for this schema.
Please review the elements and comment on their definitions, names,
usefulness, etc. and suggest additional elements for the namespace.