Hannah’s post on languages of description

The Baker article we read explained envisioned solutions to the problem I was complaining about after reading the Coyle and Hillmann article from last week: namely, that letting individual specialized communities formalize their own set of practices within the general framework would make it difficult to link related data from different kinds of resources. It seems the structure of properties and subproperties that organizes metadata according to DCAM and RDF was conceived as a means of overcoming the incompatibilities between different metadata schemas. Given that the beginning of the article combined linked data as a “body of datasets,” which presumably could include a wide range of both resources and surrogates for other resources, I’m not convinced that currently existing metadata standards couldn’t be adapted, in a similar vein to the way they’ve developed so far, to explain property relations for new kinds of resources.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s