Print

Print


>>> [log in to unmask] 08/05 12:32  >>>
>
>(Much more right than, for example, Theo's back-from-the-grave
>won't-lie-down-and-die-a-decent-death zombie plan to call everything
>Dublin Core whether or not it actually is DC.  And, sorry Theo,
that's
>all the reply you're going to get from me for your new attempt to put
>this one across us.)
>

I do NOT want to call everything DC.
For clients accessing unknown servers there is currently no way to tell
that a record schema as mentioned in explain is a DCAP based record
schema. If there is a scheme X containing DC plus an element Y,
applications will not be able to "realise" that 99% of the metadata of X
can be used in their stylesheets. Having a second scheme that indicates
that this record schema is a DCAP based  record schema seems to me the
right way to solve this. The reason to call it DCX is because it is
supposed to be qualified DC plus eXtensions.
The alternative is that applications have to know all the different
names of all variants of schemas being used for DC plus or minus some
elements.

Ray, can you reserve info:srw/schema/3/dcx for this?

Theo