Date:         Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:38:56 -0700
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: info:xv proposal
Comments: To: Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain

On Thu, 2004-10-21 at 15:03, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:

>
> Absolutely. That's would be the idea behind the default prefix.
>
>
> >  This proposal does not have an authority list, ......
> Yes it does (unless I misunderstand what you mean by an authority list).

So you are assuming a "list" somewhere that is not part of the info
registry. So info:xv is all that would be in the registry, and the rest
(i.e. what is represented by "/1/mods/resourceType/1/textual") would be
elsewhere.

OK, that said, I still have trouble with some of the levels. I prefer
that the namespace be one-to-one with a registration authority, because
that is how the registry appears to be set up. To do otherwise would
require another level in the registry, and I think we're getting almost
into structural changes here. (Which I'm not against if someone wants to
re-think the registry structure, but it should happen explicitly). The
"registration authority" level (your "/1/") would then go away. Only LC
could create "xv" identifiers. If that's the case, then the upper level
could be "info:mods" or it could be "info:lc_xv" so that others could
also have their "xv" space. That's a quibble -- semantically "xv" seems
non-specific so it doesn't make total sense that it should belong to one
organization. I think you were wanting to make it general, but I believe
that is the generality that info is supplying.

I also have a question about:

"info:xv/1/mods/resourceType/2/cartoon
the  '1' is still LC, but the '2' is OCLC who has registered an
additional resource type."

I'm not clear where it is the OCLC has "registered" this type. This
assumes that there is a registry elsewhere that stores the actual
info:xv values. This is kind of what was confusing me when I said that
if these items are in a registry down to this specific level, then you
have a registry but not a list. Now I'm not sure what we've got:
registries down to the item level? lists that can be expressed as
info:xv URI's? If the latter, how will those lists be maintained and by
whom? Do they have a particular structure that allows the URI's to be
derived? I feel like I'm missing a piece of the puzzle.
--
-------------------------------------
Karen Coyle
Digital Library Specialist
http://www.kcoyle.net
Ph: 510-540-7596 Fax: 510-848-3913
--------------------------------------