| Home |
|
Project |
|
Partners |
|
Related |
|
Archives |
|
Search |
|
Glossary |
|
Publishing and sharing your metadata application profile
A two-day workshop, 23-24th November 2000, Bonn, Germany
| 10.30 | Registration + Coffee |
| 11.00 | Welcome -Makx Dekkers/Tom Baker |
| 11.10 | Introduction to SCHEMAS -Makx Dekkers (PwC)
[HTML] [Powerpoint] |
| 12.00 | What are Application Profiles? -Rachel Heery (UKOLN)
[HTML] [Powerpoint] |
| 12.30 | Publishing and Harvesting RDF schemas -Tom Baker (GMD)
[HTML] [Powerpoint] |
| 13.00 | Lunch |
| 14.00 | Intro to Case Study 1: EULER -Colm Doyle (Netlab)
[HTML] |
| 14.30 | Case Study 1: EULER -registration in the SCHEMAS Registry
[HTML] |
| 15.00 | Coffee |
| 15.30 | MathNet -Wolfram Sperber
[HTML] [Powerpoint] |
| MathNet -Judith Plumer
[HTML] [Powerpoint] | |
| 16.00 | Open discussion of issues |
| 19.30 | Evening meal at Gustav-Stresemann-Institut |
Friday 24th November 2000
| 9.00 | Intro to Case Study 2: DCMI Education -Stuart
Sutton (University of Washington)
[HTML] [Powerpoint] |
| 9.30 | Case Study 2: DCMI Education registration in the SCHEMAS Registry
[HTML] |
| 10.30 | The Danish National Library Authority -Leif Andresen
[Powerpoint] |
| The Trial-Solution -Elisabeth Wette-Roche
[HTML] [Powerpoint] Application Profile [word] | |
| -Paul Lefrere | |
| 11.00 | Coffee |
| 11.30 | Intro to Case Study 3: EIONET -Thomas Pick
[HTML] [Powerpoint] |
| 12.00 | Case Study 3: EIONET registration in the SCHEMAS registry
[HTML] |
| 12.30 | Open discussion of issues |
| 13.00 | Lunch |
| 14.00 | Breakout sessions (see below)
|
| 14.45 | Break out groups report back |
| 15.15 | Coffee |
| 15.30 | Conclusions |
Breakout One: Re-using application profiles
This session will look at requirements, benefits and potential problems in registering, finding and re-using application profiles. We will discuss issues related to the registration and maintenance of application profiles, the level of description and usage guidance and look at issues the registry would have to take into account to allow automatic processing.
Breakout Two: Semantic versus operational profiles
RDF Schemas are best at declaring the names and definitions of metadata terms in a machine-processable way, along with various types of hyperlinked cross-references to terms in other metadata vocabularies. XML Schemas, another emerging standard, are stronger at describing explicit structural, cardinality, and datatyping constraints on metadata values in a way that can be used directly in applications. Which requirements are important for which circumstances? Is the existence of two similar standards a bug or a feature?
Breakout Three: Complexity in application profiles
This breakout session will consider how simple or complex application profiles might be. Should application profiles be viewed as simple declarations of the semantics attached to a particular application? or should they contain additional information describing typical implementations, rules for content, or other application specific data? How much information should an application profile contain?
Email comments to j.v.fraser@ukoln.ac.uk
Maintained by: UK Office for Library and
Information Networking (UKOLN)
Last updated: 02 February 2001