Changes between Version 28 and Version 29 of VLO-Taskforce/Relations

Timestamp:

01/23/14 20:09:06 (10 years ago)

Author:

herold

Comment:

--

VLO-Taskforce/Relations

@@ +1 @@
+= VLO Taskforce (CLARIN-D) =
+
+[[PageOutline(2-4)]]
+
+* [[attachment:VLO_Tischvorlage_2014-01-07.pdf|Summary of VLO metadata quality issues and curation plans]] 
+
 == VLO Facets ==
 
 * [[attachment:facets.ods|List of facets desired by CLARIN-D centers]]
 * [[attachment:VLO_facets.pdf|List of facets with ISO-CAT info (incomplete)]]
-* [[attachment:VLO_Tischvorlage_2014-01-07.pdf|Summary of VLO metadata quality issues and curation plans]] 
 
 == Exploiting ISOcat data categories ==
@@ -18 +23 @@
 1. Does VLO rely on appropriate, i.e. sufficiently concrete defined ISOcat DCs? Obviously DCs like http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2482 (language ID) or http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2484 (language name) are semantically too vague and don't allow for the differentiation between the language a resource is written in or the language of an actor in case of transcribed recordings and so on.
  * Solution: Only use narrowly defined DCs for VLO facets.
+ * Task: Evaluate the current mapping of ISOcat DCs to VlO facets
 2. Do CMDI profiles use sufficiently concrete ISOcat DCs?
  * Task: Create an overview of the DCs actually used by the centres.
- * Task: Evaluate the whitelist/blackclist XPaths with respect to why they are needed (to select vaguely defined DCs? to select MD fields that don't have a DC associated? anything else?)
+ * Task: Evaluate the whitelist/blackclist XPaths with respect to why they are needed (to select vaguely defined DCs? to select MD fields that don't have a DC associated? anything else?) [[herold|Axel Herold]]: I will prepare such a list.
  * Task: Propose the adoption of container DCs for profiles that rely on vaguely defined DCs