innovation in metadata design, implementation & best practices

DCMI Usage Board - Guidelines for Vocabulary and Encoding Scheme Qualifiers

Title:

Guidelines for Vocabulary and Encoding Scheme Qualifiers

Creator:
Traugott Koch, Traugott.Koch@ub2.lu.se
Date Issued:
2002-02-13
Identifier:
Replaces:
Is Replaced By:
Latest version:
Status of Document: This is a DCMI Usage Board Working Draft.
Description of document:

DCMI recognizes that different discourse and practice communities have legitimate, particular needs to be able to select either value qualifier schemes from an array of recognized controlled vocabularies (e.g., thesauri, classification systems, taxonomies, ontologies, and word lists) or value encoding schemes that determine the syntactic structure of those values (e.g., date encoding schemes). To promote the greatest degree of interoperablity, DCMI encourages the registration of recognized value qualifiers with DCMI.

DCMI recognizes that in order to promote interoperability through the common assignment of terms from established, publicly recognized controlled vocabularies and encoding schemes, the most critical, immediate need is to provide registration mechanisms for vocabularies for the "Subject" vocabulary.


Guidelines for registration of vocabulary and encoding scheme qualifiers


DCMI recognizes that different discourse and practice communities have legitimate, particular needs to be able to select either value qualifier schemes from an array of recognized controlled vocabularies (e.g., thesauri, classification systems, taxonomies, ontologies, and word lists) or value encoding schemes that determine the syntactic structure of those values (e.g., date encoding schemes). To promote the greatest degree of interoperablity, DCMI encourages the registration of recognized value qualifiers with DCMI.

DCMI recognizes that in order to promote interoperability through the common assignment of terms from established, publicly recognized controlled vocabularies and encoding schemes, the most critical, immediate need is to provide registration mechanisms for vocabularies for the "Subject" vocabulary.

1. General

2. Registration process

          <td valign="top">Dewey Decimal Classification</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Suggested abbreviated name (acronym)

          <td valign="top">DDC</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Maintenance agency

          <td valign="top">OCLC Forest Press</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Maintenance agency contact person name

          <td valign="top">{ Name of current editor or contact
          person }</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Maintenance agency contact email address

          <td valign="top">dewey@oclc.org</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Submitter email address

          <td valign="top">{ Email address of submitter if
          different than the maintenance agency }</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Online access point

          <td valign="top">Web Dewey in CORC
          (http://purl.oclc.org/corc/)</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Access information

          <td valign="top">
          http://www.oclc.org/fp/products/index.htm</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Additional information about the scheme

          <td valign="top">License required</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Domain(s) and extent of usage

          <td valign="top">Most frequently used universal
          classification system for library OPACs and national
          bibliographies; limited recent usage in web
          catalogues etc.</td>
        </tr>

        <tr>
          <td valign="top">

Associated element(s) or element qualifier(s)

          <td valign="top">Subject</td>
        </tr>
      </table>

    </center>

3. Guidelines

  • 3.1 Kind of schemes to be registered
    • 3.1.1 Schemes which are created and maintained by recognized entities and properly published may be registered.
  • 3.2 Naming of the schemes
    • 3.2.1 Schemes should be named with their official names. The name of the organization maintaining or owning the scheme is rarely sufficient since it does not unambiguously stand for the vocabulary alone.
    • 3.2.2 The scheme names and tokens are only appropriate for an unchanged use of an official version of the scheme. Unofficial versions, modified versions, unofficial translations and similar should not use the official label but apply a local name (e.g. based on the service, project or provider name. Ex.: The DutchESS service is using a local variant of the BC classification. It should be named DutchESSC or DutchESS-BC if it is really close to the official scheme).
    • 3.2.3 A subset of an official scheme where terms are unaltered may not be registered separately.
  • 3.3 Tokens/acronyms to be used as DCMI qualifier labels
    • 3.3.1 The tokens must be unique. Every effort will be made to maintain the short name proposed by the maintaining agency. In case of collisions, a suitable alternative will be chosen in consultation with the maintaining agency.
    • 3.3.2 Existing official acronyms or short names should be used as tokens.
    • 3.3.3 Official translated versions receive a label where a standard language code is added, e.g. DDC-fr. This is necessary since translated versions are rarely fully equivalent. Other translations, if registered, will be assigned an alternative name.
  • 3.4 Specification of scheme versions
    • 3.4.1 DCMI will register multiple versions of schemes if they appear to be important and/or it is requested by a user applying for registration.
    • 3.4.2 Versioned schemes should be registered and used when there is a considerable probability that databases exist which apply terms and classes belonging to older versions of the scheme.
    • 3.4.3 The official version of the scheme used should be indicated like in the following examples: DDC21, DDC21ab-fr (abridged DDC version 21 in French), MSC2000.

Related links:

Stuart Sutton's latest version

Draft list of candidate vocabularies

Traugott Koch ( Traugott.Koch@ub2.lu.se)

Created: 2001-05-11
Last update: 2002-02-13


Full name of the scheme