On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Diane I. Hillmann <
metadata.ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd suggest that some specific use cases for what would be gained by open
> access and how that would provide value for libraries as well as the web
> communities might be the most useful thing right now.
I
Rob Sanderson wrote:
My first question would be: Why?
Why invent a new element for title (etc.) rather than using Dublin Core?
Wouldn't it have been easier to do this building from SWAP?
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Eprints_Application_Profile
And my second question would
Jakob:
I'm glad you're interested in RDA and think it's a step in the right
direction. I'd like to update you on a few issues you mention in your
post, however, which I hope will reassure you a bit.
Jakob Voss wrote:
Hi,
As you may already noticed the Resource Description and Access (RDA)
My first question would be: Why?
Why invent a new element for title (etc.) rather than using Dublin Core?
Wouldn't it have been easier to do this building from SWAP?
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Eprints_Application_Profile
And my second question would be: Really?
251 elemen
Jakob Voss wrote:
1.) the standard is scattered in a set of PDF files instead of clean
web based HTML (compare with the W3C recommendations). You cannot
easily browse and search in RDA with your browser and a public search
engine of your choice. You cannot link to a specific paragraph to cite
Hi,
As you may already noticed the Resource Description and Access (RDA)
cataloguing instructions will be published 2009. You can submit final
comments on the full draft until February 2nd:
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/jsc/rda.html
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/jsc/rdafulldraft.htm