[tdwg-tapir] tapir metadata issues
wouter at eti.uva.nl
Wed Jul 4 10:28:01 CEST 2007
If we are confident we have a standard that suits all, I have nothing
----- Original Message -----
From: "Döring, Markus" <m.doering at BGBM.org>
To: "Renato De Giovanni" <renato at cria.org.br>; <tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 9:48 AM
Subject: Re: [tdwg-tapir] tapir metadata issues
>I cant see why we shouldnt mandate one specific standard. One variable
> I would vote for option #1
> Am 03.07.2007 3:55 Uhr schrieb "Renato De Giovanni" unter
> <renato at cria.org.br>:
>> Hi all,
>> I see the following alternatives to the language issue:
>> 1) Indicate through the specification one particular standard to be used
>> by dc:language.
>> 2) Include dc:language elements inside a new element with an attribute
>> indicating the standard being used, such as:
>> <contentLanguages standard="ethnologue">
>> Where "standard" could be an extensible controlled vocabulary.
>> 3) Extend the dc:language type so that it accepts a similar "standard"
>> Are there other alternatives we should consider?
>> I think the requirements are that:
>> * Language can be optional.
>> * There can be multiple languages.
>> * We must somehow know what is the standard used for the language.
>> I don't think it would be necessary to allow multiple language elements
>> where each one could be potentially related to different standards.
>> I don't have strong feelings about this, although I would be more
>> to choose option 2. Option 1 would bring less impact to existing
>> implementations and installations, but we would need to be sure that the
>> standard we choose would really cover all needs.
>> What do you think?
>> tdwg-tapir mailing list
>> tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org
> tdwg-tapir mailing list
> tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org
More information about the tdwg-tag