Usage Board telecon - Wednesday 17 June 2009 - 1300 UTC

This report: http://dublincore.org:8080/usage/minutes/2009/2009-06-17.dcub-telecon-report.html

Attended: Tom Baker, Stefanie Ruehle, Pete Johnston,
          Andrew Wilson, Liddy Nevile (guest), Akira Miyazawa

Regrets:  Julie Allinson

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Review of Usage Guide and related materials (Tom)

Review of legacy documentation
-- http://dublincore.org/documents/2005/11/07/usageguide/
   http://dublincore.org/documents/2005/11/07/usageguide/glossary.shtml
   http://www.bs.dk/standards/AdministrativeComponents.htm 
   http://dublincore.org/resources/faq/

2009-06-17: Everyone on the call agrees with this approach.  Tom
will propose a packet of materials, and responsibility for
leading discussion of various parts should be divided up among
UB members by mid-September for discussion in Seoul.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Review of Accessibility property (Andrew)

Pete summarizes his point about the "modeling style" assumed in
the Accessibility proposal, posted shortly before the telecon
[1]:

    Taking Tom's suggestion, that the range is the class of
    accessibility characteristics.  Liddy says this is
    reasonable.  If so, what is the relationship type -
    "exhibits or manifests" this concept of accessibility
    characteristic?  The notion that it is only accessible
    through sound, etc.  Now let's compare with, say, the agent
    properties -- creator -- "is created by" and "class of
    agents" -- has a more narrowly defined value space.  Not
    that one style is right or wrong but there do seem to be two
    different "modeling styles".  Typically, the approach is to
    define multiple properties -- see Education case mapping
    IEEE LOM standard.  In LOM, rather than having lots of
    values for a single property, multiple properties with more
    specific values.

    What is relationship of ISO accessibility for all work and
    this?  That work lists several different properties.  If
    part of the rationale for this proposed property is to
    somehow form a bridge to that more detailed work, would be
    helpful to understand the relationship between the proposed
    term and these more detailed terms.

Liddy: creator has narrow definition.  The accessibility work
took place before the ISO work moved into the MLR context, with
goal of DCAM compatibility.  The ISO work indeed had lots of
different properties.  The rationale for the proposed
dcterms:accessibility property is that in minimal,
Dublin-Core-like metadata, people are not likely to use more
than one extra property.

Way forward: 

-- Andrew will add text to the proposal [3] about the
   relationship to previous ISO work, which should be
   cited and acknowledged.

-- Discussion will continue on the list, with Liddy, and 
   in the next telecon (August? to be determined).

-- Given the process we decided in Berlin, we need to
   coordinate with AGLS on the vocabulary and work towards
   a joint decision.

-- What kind of thing are the vocabulary terms -- are they
   SKOS concepts?  (AGLS declares.)

-- Issues for discussion:

   If Pete's summary of modeling styles is correct, do we agree
   with the style used here, and can or should it be articulated
   in the proposal?

   Do all of the terms in the vocabulary fit the range 
   "Accessibility Characteristic"? (e.g. "hazard").

[1] https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0906&L=DC-USAGE&P=9373
[2] https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0906&L=DC-USAGE&P=7316
[3] http://dublincore.org/usageboardwiki/AccessibilityProposal

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Next telecon - sometime before 24 August

-- Will put up Doodle poll.

-- Possible time slots (for discussion):
   2100 UTC - 1400 Seattle / 1700 New York / 2200 London / 2300 Berlin / 0600 Tokyo+ / 0700 Canberra+
   1300 UTC - 0600 Seattle / 0900 New York / 1400 London / 1500 Berlin / 2200 Tokyo  / 2300 Canberra

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual face-to-face meeting

-- Agenda
   Proposed: 17:00-22:00 Seoul = 09:00-14:00 UK?

-- Attendance
   Confirmed: Tom, Joe, Akira
   Maybe: Pete, Andrew, Stefanie?
   Regrets: Julie