Mike Taylor wrote:

> > Date: Thu, 16 May 2002 11:14:05 +1000
> > From: Alan Kent <[log in to unmask]>
> >
> > > 3) Let's try to define a list of unprefixed index names (instead
> > > of dc.xxxx) just to standardize the names (ambiguity is the
> > > clients risc).
> >
> > For (3) I think we could put a guidelines section in, suggesting
> > simple intutive names and pointing people at Dublin Core. That is, I
> > think making suggestions is not a bad thing. Trying to formally
> > record an long official list of names I think has the Bib-1 etc
> > danger. But I think its completely reasonable to give guidence on
> > recommended style for names.
> Thanks, Alan.  That's _exactly_ what I was trying to say!

I can't tell for sure whether you're endorsing the un-prefixed list but this
is what I think:

We need to have a dc prefix, forthe 15 dc elements, with dc semantics.

Whether or not we need in addition an un-prefixed list should be argued
based on the above  premise. What would it consist of?  Obviously, it
wouldn't simply be the 15 dc elements with dc semantics again.  What then?
Would it be the 15 dc element names with semantics even more ambiguous than
dc?  What would be the point?