|
|
|
| Renardus - The Academic Subject Gateway Service in Europe | |
Data Model for the Prototype Renardus Pilot System
see also: Format of Entries
Title
| Name | Title |
| Label | Title |
| Namespace | dc1.1 |
| DC Refinement(s) | see below |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | no |
| LQ "LANG" | possible |
| DC Definition | A name given to the resource |
| DC Comment | Typically, a title will be a name by which the resource is formally known |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | - |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | Problem of initial articles for the use of sorting algorithms? |
| Name | Title ¦ alternative |
| Label | Title ¦ Alternative |
| Namespace | dcterms |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | O |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | possible |
| DC Definition | Any form of the title used as a substitute or alternative to the formal title of the resource |
| DC Comment | This qualifier can include Title abbreviations as well as translations |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | - |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | - |
Creator
| Name | Creator |
| Label | Creator |
| Namespace | dc1.1 |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | see below |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | An entity primarily responsible for making the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Examples of a Creator include a person, an organisation, or a service. Typically, the name of a Creator should be used to indicate the entity. |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | - |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | Open "agent" discussion! |
| Name | Creator ¦ R qualifier |
| Label | ... |
| Namespace | rmesq |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | For personal names: last name and first name in separate tags |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | An entity primarily responsible for making the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Examples of a Creator include a person, an organisation, or a service. Typically, the name of a Creator should be used to indicate the entity. |
| R Definition | Creator(s) are person(s) which are responsible for the intellectual content of the document(s), e.g. webmasters are no creators. |
| R Comment | If this field is applicable it is strongly recommended to provide the creator. For Renardus normalization process it is strongly recommended that last name and first name are clearly distinguishable. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | Open "agent" discussion! Do we need/allow more information about the creator like Email etc.? |
Description
| Name | Description |
| Label | Description |
| Namespace | dc1.1 |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | possible |
| DC Definition | An account of the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Description may include but is not limited to: an abstract, table of contents, reference to a graphical representation of content or a free-text account of the content. |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | For the Renardus normalization process it is not enough to provide only a URL, for cross-search reasons the field description must contain free text. |
| Best practice | Use text (and not only a URL) to describe the resource. |
| Open question(s) | URI has not been approved as an encoding scheme; it could/should be submitted as a general DC encoding scheme? |
Subject
| Name | Subject |
| Label | Subject |
| Namespace | dc1.1 |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | see below |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | see below |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | possible |
| DC Definition | The topic of the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Typically, a subject will be expressed as keywords, key phrases or classification codes that describe a topic of the resource. Recommended best practice is to select a value from a controlled vocabulary or formal classification scheme. |
| R Definition | Unqualified information for keywords and/or classification system(s) (notations and captions) used by partners. |
| R Comment | Here is the place for all subject information used by partners like controlled keywords, free keywords, classification system(s) and/or captions. In the prototype system there will be no further distinction between the several kinds of subject. In the prototype system the provision of keywords is strongly recommended, in the final system the provision of keywords is required. |
| Best practice | It is highly recommended that either freetext or controlled vocabulary be included in the metadata where appropriate and feasible. It is also recommended that a controlled vocabulary should be used with encoding scheme specified (see below). |
| Open question(s) | May Subject element be used in a unqualified form? |
| Name | Subject ¦ DC encoding schemes |
| Label | ... |
| Namespace | dcterms |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | LCSH, MeSH, DDC, LCC, UDC |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | possible |
| DC Definition | The topic of the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Typically, a subject will be expressed as keywords, key phrases or classification codes that describe a topic of the resource. Recommended best practice is to select a value from a controlled vocabulary or formal classification scheme. |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | - |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | - |
| Name | Subject ¦ R encoding schemes |
| Label | ... |
| Namespace | rmesq |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | All other encoding schemes used by the partners, see Acronym & Abbreviation list at http://renardus.sub.uni-goettingen.de/renap/racr.html |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | possible |
| DC Definition | - |
| DC Comment | - |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | Here is the place for all subject information used by partners like controlled keywords, free keywords, classification system(s) and/or captions expressed as Renardus encoding scheme. In the prototype system there will be no further distinction between the several kinds of subject. In the prototype system the provision of keywords is strongly recommended, in the final system the provision of keywords is required. |
| Best practice | Always use the encoding scheme(s) for terms from a controlled vocabulary. |
| Open question(s) | Do we want to include an additional qualifier (identifier) to link to a registry where all encoding schemes are defined in a special schema (e.g. based on RSLP schema?). NKOS or OCLC will probably develop such a schema. NOTE: Additional encoding schemes will be registered for those used in the Renardus domain (probably all those registered in the MARC list of subject and classification schemes as well as others that are identified). |
| Name | Subject ¦ Ren-DDC |
| Label | ... |
| Namespace | rmesq (or dcterms) |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | DDC |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | Ren-DDC for normalization, DDC 21 can be extend by RENARDUS specific captions. Ren-DDC captions and Ren-DDC notations must be stored separately |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | Dewey Decimal Classification, see also: http://www.oclc.org/dewey/index.htm |
| DC Comment | - |
| R Definition | DDC 21: adapted DDC version for cross-browsing puporse. |
| R Comment | This field is created in the Renardus normalization process via mapping tables from the particular Subject Gateway classification scheme. Each partner has to map the own classification system to DDC. Mapping guideline for DDC will be prepared in the context of WP 7. Only captions and not notations will be displayed. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | Do we need this metadata element defined in this namespace (only in case we change captions regarding European needs)? |
Identifier
| Name | Identifier ¦ URI |
| Label | Identifier ¦ URI |
| Namespace | dcterms |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | URI |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | yes for translated sites and/or mirrored, copied sites |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context. |
| DC Comment | Recommended best practice is to identify the resource by means of a string or number conforming to a formal identification system. Example formal identification systems include the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) (including the Uniform Resource Locator (URL)), the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and the International Standard Book Number (ISBN).. |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | URI means URL, URN, DOI, ISBN, ISSN etc. For Renardus normalization process DOI, ISBN und ISSN must be displayed in a URN syntax. In the prototype system no distinction will be made between resource URL, mirrored, copied resource URL(s) and URL(s) for archive reasons. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | - |
Language
| Name | Language ¦ ISO639-2 |
| Label | Language ¦ ISO639-2 |
| Namespace | dcterms |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | ISO 639-2 |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | - |
| DC Definition | A language of the intellectual content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Recommended best practice for the values of the Language element is defined by RFC 1766 which includes a two-letter Language Code (taken from the ISO 639 standard), followed optionally, by a two-letter Country Code (taken from the ISO 3166 standard). For example, en for English, fr for French, or en-uk for English used in the United Kingdom |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | The language code is the ISO 639-2, three letter code. SUB will provide a mapping between the two letter and three letter language code but this will also be found on the LoC site – ISO 639-2: http://lcweb.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/englangn.html |
| Best practice | Use codes rather than text. Recommended means if there is any spoken or written text, supply. |
| Open question(s) | - |
Type
| Name | Type |
| Label | Type |
| Namespace | dc1.1 |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | The nature or genre of the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Type includes terms describing general categories, functions, genres, or aggregation levels for content. Recommended best practice is to select a value from a controlled vocabulary (for example, the list of DCMI Types). To describe the physical or digital manifestation of the resource, use the Format element. |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | Subject Gateways should provide their original types without any encoding scheme. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | Should we use a controlled list and identify the source (Renardus partners' list) with encoding scheme? |
| Name | Type ¦ DCMIType |
| Label | Type | DCMI Type Vocabulary |
| Namespace | dcmitype |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | DCMI Type Vocabulary (DCT1) |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | The nature or genre of the content of the resource. |
| DC Comment | Type includes terms describing general categories, functions, genres, or aggregation levels for content. Recommended best practice is to select a value from a controlled vocabulary (for example, the list of DCMI Types). To describe the physical or digital manifestation of the resource, use the Format element. |
| R Definition | - |
| R Comment | SUB will provide a mapping of all types used in partners’ subject gateways to DCT1 (probably except of ZADI). The possibility and usability of a mapping to DCT2 will be investigated in the context of WP 7. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | - |
Country
| Name | Country ¦ ISO 3166-1 |
| Label | Country ¦ ISO 3166-1 |
| Namespace | rmesq |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | ISO 3166-1 (two letter code), http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/ Special use/user assigned codes can be used to cover international and european resources. Codes can also be used for 'not available or 'not applicable', but the default should be blank to show that, where a code exists, effort has been made to find out this information. It would be possible to assign country codes to a hierarchical mapping within the normalisation process. List of additional codes besides ISO 3166-1: 'EU' European Union
#User-assigned codes for RENARDUS:
#User-assigned codes for obtaining hierarchies: |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | yes |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | - |
| DC Comment | - |
| R Definition | Country in which the publisher of the resource is located or the country which represents the cultural context of the resource. Code for the representation of names of countries. |
| R Comment | Recommend two entries in the country element covering cultural heritage and country of origin. The country element has nothing to do with the CONTENT of a resource, but the cultural heritage of the resource/server or its geographical location. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | - |
Administrative Renardus elements
Two administrative elements are used in Renardus for practical reasons: "Full Record ID" and "SBIG ID".
Full Record URL
| Name | Full Record URL ¦ URL |
| Label | Full Record URL ¦ URL |
| Namespace | rmesq |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | URL |
| Obligation | R |
| Repeatable | no |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | - |
| DC Comment | - |
| R Definition | A URL that leads to a detailed display of each record at the originating service site. |
| R Comment | Because some partners generate their records dynamically it might be a problem to provide a URL to the full record display. |
| Best practice | - |
| Open question(s) | - |
SBIG ID
| Name | SBIG ID ¦ acronym |
| Label | SBIG ID ¦ Acronym |
| Namespace | rmesq |
| DC Refinement(s) | - |
| R Refinement(s) | - |
| DC Encoding Scheme(s) | - |
| R Encoding Scheme(s) | Acronym of Subject Gateway |
| Obligation | M |
| Repeatable | no |
| LQ "LANG" | no |
| DC Definition | - |
| DC Comment | - |
| R Definition | A stable unique acronym also well defined in the Collection Level Description. |
| R Comment | Must be the same acronym as used in the Renardus Collection Level Description schema field "Acronym". |
| Best practice | Use only the letters of the 128 ASCII characters 0 to 127 and no special characters (see e.g. http://www.cs.mun.ca/~michael/c/ascii-table.html). It is allowed to use a hyphen for the acronym. |
| Open question(s) | - |
Contact Heike Neuroth: neuroth@mail.sub.uni-goettingen.de
Questions and comments are welcome!
|
bach to Renardus Application Profile - Overview back to SUB Renardus home (official) back to SUB Renardus home (restricted) back to Renardus home |
 |
© 2002 SUB Göttingen. . SUB Renardus Team