WDIFF

draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-05.txt --> draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-06.txt

Internet-Draft: draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-05.txt draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-06.txt J. Kunze
Dublin Core Metadata University of California
Expires 18 June 19 August 2007 T. Baker
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
19 February 2007 Office of the President
18 December 2006

The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set

(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-05.txt)

(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kunze-rfc2413bis-06.txt)

Status of this Document

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as ``work "work in progress.'' progress."

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

Distribution of this document is unlimited. Please send comments to
jak@ucop.edu.
jak@ucop.edu

Abstract

The Dublin Core Metadata Workshop Series began in 1995 with an
invitational workshop which brought together librarians, digital
library researchers, content experts, and text-markup experts to
promote better discovery standards for electronic resources. The
resulting metadata element set is perhaps the most widely adopted
convention for structuring resource descriptions designed to bridge
networked information systems and content providers in the
publishing, library, museum, scholarly, archival, and government
communities. It defines

Defines fifteen metadata elements for resource description in a
cross-disciplinary information environment.

J. Kunze [Page 1]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006

1. Introduction

J. Kunze 1. Introduction [Page 1]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata February 2007

resource description in a cross-disciplinary information environment.

This document, containing document contains the current text of Dublin Core "Version 1.1".
Version 1.1 is the basis of ANSI/NISO Z39.85 [Z39.85] plus
corrections Z39.85-2001 [Z39.85]. The text
in the present RFC closely follows the text submitted for consistency the 2007
revision of ANSI/NISO Z39.85, especially sections 2-6 and clarity, 10-12. The
present RFC obsoletes the Internet RFC 2413, 2413 [RFC2413], which was the
first published version of the Dublin Core. Core ("Version 1.0"). The main
differences between the present RFC and RFC 2413 are that in the wording
of definitions -- for Contributor and Date (semantically broadened),
for Relation (clarified), and in general removing redundant
references to "the content of" a resource. In addition, the present
RFC recommends lowercase element names (consistent with RDF property types) and
types), remains silent about the unrestrictedness of element ordering
and repeatability (application profiles being the proper place to
discuss such topics).
Sections 2-5 topics), and 10-12 are taken directly from ANSI/NISO Z39.85. references the current abstract model,
vocabularies, and namespace policies in which the Dublin Core is
embedded.

2. Foreword

The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) began Element Set is a vocabulary of fifteen
properties for use in resource description. The name "Dublin" is due
to its origin at a 1995 with an invitational workshop in Dublin, Ohio that brought together
librarians, digital library researchers, content providers, Ohio; "core"
because its elements are broad and text-
markup experts to improve discovery standards generic, usable for information describing a
wide range of resources.

The original fifteen element "Dublin Core" described in this standard is part
of a larger set of metadata vocabularies and technical specifications
maintained by the Dublin Core emerged as a small Metadata Initiative (DCMI). The full
set of
descriptors that quickly drew global interest from vocabularies, DCMI Metadata Terms [DCTERMS], also includes a wide variety
set of
information providers in the arts, sciences, education, business, and
government sectors.

Since resource classes, the original workshop there has been steadily growing interest DCMI Type Vocabulary [DCTYPE]. The
terms in resource descriptions that DCMI vocabularies are easy to create and that almost
anyone can understand. The potential to increase visibility of
resources in a collection across sectors and subject domains, and to
do so at low cost, is broadly appealing. Services needing
semantically rich descriptions would continue intended to provide them, but
would attract cross-disciplinary discovery by also providing
universally understandable descriptions common across disciplines.
The digital tourist metaphor is apt. Internet travelers seeking
information be used in foreign disciplines can use the Dublin Core's
constrained vocabulary to obtain basic guidance combination
with terms from other, compatible vocabularies in a language that
they understand. Full accessibility to the culture and its services
still requires mastery context of the local vocabulary
application profiles and environment, but a
set of simple facts inscribed in Dublin Core can bring to on the
tourist's attention a foreign information portal that might otherwise
have escaped notice.

The interest in cross-domain discovery fueled growing participation

J. Kunze 2. Foreword [Page 2]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006

in a series basis of subsequent the DCMI workshops. The Dublin Core metadata
element set described here is a set of 15 descriptors that resulted
from this effort in interdisciplinary and international consensus
building. As Abstract Model
[DCAM].

All changes made to terms of June 2000 the Dublin Core exists in over 20
translations, has Metadata Element Set
since 2001 have been adopted by CEN/ISSS (European Committee for
Standardization / Information Society Standardization System), and is
documented in two internet RFCs (Requests for Comments). It also has
official standing within the WWW Consortium and the Z39.50 standard.
Dublin Core metadata is endorsed formally reviewed by governments in three
countries for promoting discovery of government information in
electronic form, and Dublin Core is under consideration as a national
information standard in at least five others.

The Dublin Core is not intended to displace any other metadata
standard. Rather it is intended to co-exist -- often DCMI Usage Board in the same
resource description -- with metadata standards that offer other
semantics. It is fully expected that descriptive records will
contain a mix of elements drawn from various metadata standards, both
simple and complex. Examples of this kind of mixing and of HTML
encoding of Dublin Core in general are given in RFC 2731 [RFC2731].

The simplicity context of Dublin Core can be both a strength and
a weakness.
Simplicity lowers the cost of creating metadata and promotes
interoperability. On the other hand, simplicity does not accommodate
the semantic DCMI Namespace Policy [DCNMSPC]. The namespace policy describes
how DCMI terms are assigned Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) and functional richness supported by complex metadata
schemes. In effect, the Dublin Core element set trades richness for
wide visibility. The design of Dublin Core mitigates this loss by
encouraging
sets limits on the use range of richer metadata schemes in combination with
Dublin Core. Richer schemes can also editorial changes that may allowably be mapped
made to Dublin Core for
export or for cross-system searching. Conversely, simple Dublin Core
records can be used as a starting point for the creation of more
complex descriptions. labels, definitions, and usage comments associated with
existing DCMI terms.

3. Scope and Purpose

The Dublin Core metadata element set Metadata Element Set is a standard for cross-domain
information
resource description. Here an information resource is
defined to be anything that has identity; this is the definition used As in Internet RFC 2396, 3986 [RFC3986], "Uniform
Resource Identifiers Identifier (URI): Generic
Syntax", by Tim Berners-Lee et al [RFC2396]. For Dublin Core
applications a resource will typically be an electronic document.

This standard is for the element set only, which is generally used in
the context of a specific project or application. Local or community
based requirements and policies may impose additional restrictions,
rules, and interpretations. It is Syntax," this specification does
not limit the purpose scope of this standard
to define the detailed criteria by which the element set will what might be used
with specific projects and applications. a resource.

J. Kunze 3. Scope and Purpose [Page 3] 2]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006 February 2007

The elements described in this standard are typically used in the
context of an application profile which constrains or specifies their
use in accordance with local or community-based requirements and
policies. The specification of such implementation detail is outside
the scope of this standard.

4. Definitions

DCMI -- the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, the maintenance agency for
the Dublin Core.

Information resource -- anything that has identity (the same
definition as in Internet RFC 2396). for
Dublin Core Metadata Element Set.

Lifecycle of an information a resource -- a sequence of events that mark the
development and use of an information a resource. Some examples of events in a
lifecycle are: Conception conception of an invention,
Creation creation of a draft, Revision
revision of an article, Publication publication of a book,
Acquisition acquisition by a
library, Transcription transcription to magnetic disk, Migration migration to optical
storage, Translation translation into English, and Derivation derivation of a new work
(e.g., a movie).

5. The Element Set

In the element descriptions below, each element has a descriptive
label intended to convey a common semantic understanding of the
element, as well as ("label") for human consumption and a unique, machine-understandable, single-word
name intended to make the syntactic specification of elements simpler unique token ("name") for encoding schemes.

Although some environments, such as HTML, are not case-sensitive, it
is recommended best practice always to adhere to the case conventions
in the element names given below to avoid conflicts
use in machine processing.

In accordance with the event that DCMI Namespace Policy [DCNMSPC], the metadata "name" of
an element is subsequently extracted or converted appended to a case-
sensitive environment, such DCMI namespace URI to construct a Uniform
Resource Identifier as XML (Extensible Markup Language) [XML]
or RDF (Resource Description Framework) [RDF].

To promote global interoperability, a number globally unique identifier for that element.
The use of the element
descriptions suggest a controlled vocabulary for names and URIs in the respective
element values. It context of different
implementation technologies is assumed that other controlled vocabularies
will be developed for interoperability within certain local domains. explained in DCMI Encoding Guidelines
[DCENCOD].

6. The Elements

Element Name: title

Label: Title
Definition: A name given to the resource.
Comment: Typically, Title will be a name by which the resource is
formally known.

Element Name: creator

Label: Creator
Definition: An entity primarily responsible for making the resource.
Comment: Examples of a Creator include a person, an organization,
or a service. Typically, the name of a Creator should be
used to indicate the entity.

J. Kunze 6. The Elements [Page 4] 3]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006

used to indicate the entity. February 2007

Element Name: subject

Label: Subject
Definition: The topic of the resource.
Comment: Typically, the topic will be represented using
keywords, key phrases, or classification codes.
Recommended best practice is to use an encoding
scheme such as a classification or a controlled
vocabulary. To describe the spatial or temporal
topic of the resource, use the Coverage element.

Element Name: description

Label: Description
Definition: An account of the resource.
Comment: Description may include but is not limited to:
an abstract, a table of contents, a graphical
representation, or a free-text account of
the resource.

Element Name: publisher

Label: Publisher
Definition: An entity responsible for making the resource available.
Comment: Examples of a Publisher include a person, an
organization, or a service. Typically, the name of
a Publisher should be used to indicate the entity.

Element Name: contributor

Label: Contributor
Definition: An entity primarily responsible for making
contributions to the resource.
Comment: Examples of a Contributor include a person, an
organization, or a service. Typically, the name of a
Contributor should be used to indicate the entity.

Element Name: date

Label: Date
Definition: A point or period of time associated with an event
in the lifecycle of the resource.
Comment: Date may be used to express temporal information
at any level of granularity. Recommended best
practice is to use an encoding scheme, such as
the W3CDTF profile of ISO 8601 [W3CDTF].

J. Kunze 6. The Elements [Page 5]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006

Element Name: type

Label: Type
Definition: The genre, functional category, nature or aggregation level genre of the resource.
Comment: Recommended best practice is to use a controlled

J. Kunze 6. The Elements [Page 4]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata February 2007

vocabulary such as the the DCMI Type Vocabulary [DCT].
[DCTYPE]. To describe the file format, physical medium,
or dimensions of the resource, use the Format element.

Element Name: format

Label: Format
Definition: The file format, physical medium, or dimensions
of the resource.
Comment: Examples of dimensions include size and duration.
Recommended best practice is to use a controlled
vocabulary such as the list of Internet Media Types
[MIME].

Element Name: identifier

Label: Identifier
Definition: An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given
context.
Comment: Recommended best practice is to identify the
resource by means of a string conforming
to a formal identification system.

Element Name: source

Label: Source
Definition: A related The resource from which the described resource is
derived.
Comment: The described resource may be derived from the
related resource in whole or in part. Recommended
best practice is to identify the related resource
by means of a string conforming to a formal
identification system.

Element Name: language

Label: Language
Definition: A language of the resource.
Comment: Recommended best practice is to use an encoding scheme, a controlled
vocabulary such as RFC 3066 [RFC3066] or ISO 639-2 [ISO639]. 4646 [RFC4646].

Element Name: relation

Label: Relation
Definition: A related resource.

J. Kunze 6. The Elements [Page 6]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006
Comment: Recommended best practice is to identify the
related resource by means of a string conforming
to a formal identification system.

J. Kunze 6. The Elements [Page 5]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata February 2007

Element Name: coverage

Label: Coverage
Definition: The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the
spatial applicability of the resource, or the
jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant.
Comment: Spatial topic may be a named place or a location
specified by its geographic coordinates. Temporal
period may be a named period, date, or date range.
A jurisdiction may be a named administrative entity. entity
or a geographic place to which the resource applies.
Recommended best practice is to use a controlled
vocabulary such as the Thesaurus of Geographic Names
[TGN]. Where appropriate, named places or time periods
can be used in preference to numeric identifiers such
as sets of coordinates or date ranges.

Element Name: rights

Label: Rights
Definition: Information about rights held in and over the resource.
Comment: Typically, rights information includes a statement about
various property rights associated with the resource,
including intellectual property rights.

7. Security Considerations

The Dublin Core element set poses no risk to computers and networks.
It poses minimal risk to searchers who obtain incorrect or private
information due to careless mapping from rich data descriptions to
the simple Dublin Core scheme. elements. No other security concerns are likely.

8. IANA Considerations

This document has no actions for IANA.

9. Author's Address Authors' Addresses

John A. Kunze
California Digital Library
University of California, Office of the President
415 20th St, 4th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612-3550, USA

Fax: +1 510-893-5212
EMail: jak@ucop.edu

Thomas Baker
Director, Specifications and Documentation
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
c/o OCLC Research

J. Kunze 9. Author's Address Authors' Addresses [Page 7] 6]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006 February 2007

Dublin, OH 43017, USA

Email: tbaker@tbaker.de

10. References

[DCT]

[DCAM] DCMI Abstract Model.
http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/

[DCENCOD] DCMI Encoding Guidelines.
http://dublincore.org/resources/expressions/

[DCNMSPC] DCMI Namespace Policy.
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-namespace/

[DCTERMS] DCMI Metadata Terms.
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/

[DCTYPE] DCMI Type Vocabulary. DCMI Recommendation, 11 July 2000.
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-type-vocabulary/

[ISO3166] ISO 3166 - Codes for the representation of names of
countries. http://www.din.de/

[ISO639] ISO 639-2 - Codes for the representation of names of
languages, Alpha-3 code (ISO 639-2:1998).
http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langhome.html

[MIME] Internet Media Types.
http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/

[RDF] Resource Description Framework. http://www.w3.org/RDF/

[RFC3066]

[RFC4646] Tags for the Identification of Identifying Languages, Internet RFC
3066. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3066.txt 4646.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4646.txt

[RFC3986] Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax,
Internet RFC 3986. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt

[RFC2413] Dublin Core Metadata for Resource Discovery. Internet RFC
2413. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2413.txt

[RFC2731] Encoding Dublin Core Metadata in HTML. Internet RFC 2731.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2731.txt

[TGN] Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names.
http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/tgn/index.html

[W3CDTF] Date and Time Formats, W3C Note.
http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime

[XML] Extensible Markup Language. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml

[Z39.85] ANSI/NISO Standard Z39.85-2001 - The Dublin Core Metadata
Element Set.
http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-85.pdf

J. Kunze 10. References [Page 7]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata February 2007

11. Appendix A: Further Reading

(This appendix is not part of the standard. It is included for
information only.)

Further information about the Dublin Core metadata element set is
available at the URL,

http://dublincore.org/

J. Kunze 11. Appendix A: Further Reading [Page 8]

Internet Draft Dublin Core Metadata December 2006

This web site contains information about workshops, reports, working
group papers, projects, and new developments concerning the Dublin
Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI).

12. Appendix B: Maintenance Agency

(This appendix is not part of the standard. It is included for
information only.)

The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) is responsible for the
development, standardization standardization, and promotion of the Dublin Core
metadata element set. Information on DCMI is available at the URL,

http://dublincore.org/

13. Copyright Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). IETF Trust (2007). This document is subject to the
rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as
set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Expires 18 June 19 August 2007

J. Kunze 13. Copyright Notice [Page 9] 8]

----