[rdfweb-dev] Proposal: UsingDublinCoreCreator
karl at la-grange.net
Thu Jul 24 12:40:52 UTC 2003
Le mercredi, 23 juil 2003, à 21:39 America/Montreal, Masahide Kanzaki a
>> My conclusion is somewhat conservative, somewhat radical: to only use
>> dc:creator to relate a document to a name of a creator of the
>> And to use new RDF relations (eg. foaf:maker) when we want to relate a
>> document to an agent that created it.
> I read through wiki page and agreed with the discussion, but don't
> it's good to 'restrict' dc:creator to name only.
You mean physical person ?
> As Dan noted on the wiki, there are many many implementations which use
> dc:creator as a container of Agent/People. The change of (or adding new
> restriction on) dc:creator syntax will make so many people unhappy.
As defined in the spec:
Term Name: creator
Definition: An entity primarily responsible for making the content of
Comment: Examples of a Creator include a person, an organisation, or a
service. Typically, the name of a Creator should be used to indicate
Type of Term: element
Date Issued: 1999-07-02
A key of the interoperability is not to redefine what others have made.
If you are not satisfied with the original property, create a new one
which is more complex and suit your needs.
Is the problem that you can't distinguish between a human and a
machine? If it's that, you can add a property to qualify the nature of
the creator, something ala type="person".
So an agent can have created the document, now I think, the debate is
that you have a human who has created a document with a tool or a
series of tools and in this sense the property made is interesting or
I have one question though. What about if your tool is not ONE tool but
a series of tools. You have used this and that to create, and you
finally finished it by hands. Would you like to keep the history of the
tools used to edit it?
Karl, foaf newbie
More information about the foaf-dev