Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

specify default value lists for metadata properties #79

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 24, 2015 · 3 comments
Closed

specify default value lists for metadata properties #79

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Mar 24, 2015 · 3 comments
Labels
Priority-High

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link 

There is currently no way to predictably determine the schemes/roles/types of 
the various metadata properties the Publications spec defines or that we expect 
to be drawn from DCTERMS.

Right now, only recommendations of ONIX and MARC Code Lists are provided, but 
implementers cannot reliably determine which list the value of these properties 
is drawn from. Without predictability, there is no way to tell one title from 
another, for example, or the role a contributor played. This lack of 
predictability can impact the ability to process or render the information.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mgarrish on 13 Feb 2011 at 7:15
@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

A possible solution to this problem would be to define default code lists for 
the affected properties. As an example, ONIX 3 Code List 17 numeric codes could 
be defined as the default for creator roles when no scheme is attached to the 
role property. If a scheme is attached, it would designate the code the value 
corresponds to. Possible recommended scheme identifiers could be maintained 
separately from the specification to provide additional reliability.

The absence of a scheme on the identifier property would imply an 
unknown/proprietary scheme is being used.

Original comment by mgarrish on 13 Feb 2011 at 7:24

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Original comment by markus.g...@gmail.com on 18 Mar 2011 at 10:16

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author 

This issue has been addressed in r2823.

Reference to specific code lists have been removed and the scheme property 
broadened so that it can be used to identify the source any property's value is 
drawn from or system it conforms to.

Original comment by mgarrish on 25 Apr 2011 at 8:39

  • Changed state: Done

@GoogleCodeExporter GoogleCodeExporter mentioned this issue Mar 24, 2015
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Priority-High
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@GoogleCodeExporter