DCMI Usage Board - Tuesday, 2008-04-29 2100 UTC telecon - agenda

This agenda:  http://dublincore.org/usage/minutes/2008/2008-04-29.dcub-telecon-agenda.html
UB meetings:  http://dublincore.org/usage/minutes/
UB mail list: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/dc-usage.html
UB wiki:      http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/
              http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/#Issues - where long-term issues are tracked

Time: 1300 Seattle / 1600 New York / 2100 London / 2200 Berlin / 0500 Tokyo+ / 0600 Sydney+
[Note: times corrected for Tokyo and Sydney]

Expected: Tom, Diane, Julie, Joe, Pete, Andrew, Stefanie
Regrets: Akira

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Previous telecon - March 26 - report
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0803&L=dc-usage&P=3946

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Telecon schedule

1) Thursday, May 15 - Karen Coyle's draft guidelines on Application Profiles
   -- Guest attendees will be invited
   -- Usual time is okay, but Karen would prefer:
      0600 Seattle / 0900 New York / 1400 London / 1500 Berlin / 2300 Tokyo  / 0100 Sydney

2) Wednesday, May 28 - regrets: Diane
   -- "Title" proposal

3) Tuesday, June 03

4) Wednesday, June 18 - regrets: Joe

5) Calls in July, August, September
   -- July 29?
   -- August 19-21?
   -- September 2-4?


----------------------------------------------------------------------
REVIEW OF EPRINTS/SWAP PROFILE

Eprints/SWAP Application Profile
-- http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/EprintsProfileReview

----------------------------------------------------------------------
PROFILE REVIEW CRITERIA

Editing continues at:
http://colab.mpdl.mpg.de/mediawiki/ApplicationProfiles/ProfileReviewCriteriaDe

See Tom's message (April 3) at:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0804&L=dc-usage&P=148

Discussion:
-- The language of the criteria does not match that of the latest Description 
   Set Profile draft [1].  It should be edited to do so.

-- DSP model [1] has "templates" and "constraints".  We should be 
   testing whether constraints used in the profile are consistent with 
   those used in the DSP spec.

   [1] http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/03/31/dc-dsp/

-- Do we need to evaluate syntax guidelines associated with a
   profile?  E.g.: "Does the syntax specified support the constructs
   of the DSP spec that are required for this model?"

-- The criteria do not explicitly ask the reviewer to verify that 
   the entities of the domain model correspond to the Descriptions
   in the Description Set.  Perhaps the guidelines should at least
   test for contradictions between the two.  For future discussion.

ACTION 2008-03-26: Tom to propose review questions about
constraints, split section currently labeled "DSP" into new
section "Metadata Vocabularies Referenced".

ACTION 2008-03-26: Tom to add explanation that evaluation of 
syntax is out of scope.

ACTION 2008-03-26: Diane to edit ProfileReviewCriteriaDe to show
how references can be formatted more readably.

======================================================================
TERM DECISION TREE

Editing continues at:
http://colab.mpdl.mpg.de/mediawiki/ApplicationProfiles/TermDecisionTree

Pete points out that XML datatypes are identified with URI but 
not documented in an RDF schema.  General consensus that we should
relax the requirement for a schema - enough to assert that something
is (for example) an RDF property.

Noted Mikael's objection that TermDecisionTree does not
provide guidance on how to declare a new term so it becomes
DCAM-compatible.  Tom differentiates between a DCAM compliance
test and a full vocabulary review.

Do we really need ection differentiate VES/SES here?
Consensus that we need an explanation, but not clear whether
this belongs in TermDecisionTree.

Andrew should write up criteria for differentiating SES/VES,
though they do not necessarily belong in TermDecisionTree.
Will first write, then we can decide where to put it.

ACTION 2008-03-26: Andrew to edit Term Decision Tree -
http://colab.mpdl.mpg.de/mediawiki/ApplicationProfiles/TermDecisionTree,
proposing a more appropriate title.

ACTION 2008-03-26: Andrew to write up criteria for
differentiating Vocabulary and Syntax Encoding Schemes
(http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/SesAndVes).







======================================================================
Topics for future telecons

----------------------------------------------------------------------
RANGE OF dcterms:title AND NEW TERM PROPOSAL

Akira proposes dcterms:titleAsText
-- http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/TitleProposal

======================================================================
SMALL PROBLEM WITH NAMESPACE DOCUMENTS

-- Pete has pointed out that dcterms:publisher is used with a literal
   value in the namespace documents for http://purl.org/dc/terms/, etc
   http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0802&L=dc-usage&P=2654

   In
        http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/
        http://purl.org/dc/terms/
        http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/
        http://purl.org/dc/dcam/
   we say

        Namespace-URI dcterms:publisher "The Dublin Core Metadata
        Initiative"@en-US .

   i.e. we use the new dcterms:publisher property with a literal value.

   But the definition of that new property says the range of
   dcterms:publisher is the class dcterms:Agent.

   i.e. I think we've been tripped up by our own introduction of ranges.

   I think we need to do one of the following:

   (i) revert to using the dc:publisher property, for which range is
   unspecified so a literal object is OK (even if a bit absurd in some
   ways)
   (ii) change to using a blank node as object

   Namespace-URI dcterms:publisher _:x .
   _:x rdf:value "The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative"@en-US .

   (iii) coin a URI for DCMI as Agent and use that as object (and ideally
   that URI should either be a # URI or do the 303 thing because
   DCMI-as-Agent is not an information resource). (Maybe we already have a
   PURL that serves this purpose, but I suspect we aren't very clear about
   whether many of the existing PURLs (other than the term URIs) denote
   docs or other things)

   I'm guessing this is actually generated by the scripts so may need
   someone to tweak them.

======================================================================
PROFILES TO REVIEW

Kernel Application Profile - http://dublincore.org/kernelwiki

UKOLN Geospatial application profile?
-- http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/images/e/ef/Geospatial_Application_Profile.doc

======================================================================
DOMAINS AND RANGES

ACTION 2007-08-26: Pete and Mikael to investigate the
usefulness of defining a class of 'non-literal' and assess what
the consequences of this would be for machine processability.
(Usage Board should track issues involved in the notion of
a range of 'non-literal'.)
-- continues

======================================================================
ANNUAL MEETING - 21 SEPTEMBER IN BERLIN

KIM Project Working Group (http://www.kim-forum.org/)
joint session on Sunday, 21 September
-- continues

======================================================================
Telecon time-slot alternatives are:
     1. 0600 Seattle / 0900 New York / 1400 London (UTC) / 1500 Berlin / 2300 Tokyo  / 0100 Sydney
     2. 1300 Seattle / 1600 New York / 2100 London (UTC) / 2200 Berlin / 0600 Tokyo+ / 0800 Sydney+

======================================================================
DIALING INSTRUCTIONS 
(http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/DialingInstructions):
     1) Dial: local country number
        -- UK        0800-032-0634
        -- Germany   0800-181-2311
        -- Australia 1800-006-458
        -- Sweden    020-792-635
        -- Japan     00531-13-0842 "KDD Only"
        -- US        skip this step...
     2) You hear: "Welcome... Please enter your 10-digit..."
        Type: 888-448-7101#
     3) You hear: "Please enter..."
        Type:     764-6081#