Hi Peter, I think this thread will stay unanswered, because nobody believes in the DC strongly enough. The basic idea was that any metadata on the metalink (description, title, author, origin, creation date etc) could be moved to an already available standard like the Dublic Core.
Advantages mentioned: - Smaller metalink spec - Easily readable for clients that already support the DC (like some of the search engine bots) Problem seems to be twofold: referring to another standard for metadata makes the metalink spec incomplete, while pointing out specific parts of the DC as obligatory is not practical. General opinion seems to be: it would be cool to use already existing technology, but there doesn't seem to be a real benefit at the moment. I'm not going to convince you, and I have been asking Anthony to veto this off the table at this point as it does not help with the current standardization AND we have no passionate defenders of this idea. Greets, Bram On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 11:12 +0200, Peter Poeml wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 08:01:04 +0200, Hampus Wessman wrote: > > > > That's a nice idea! Dublin core is a really interesting option. > > I have no real opinion about Dublin Core, because I'm not familiar with > it. I don't immediately see any particular value of switching to it; > however I'm ready to be convinced. How would it bring us forward? > > Peter --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
