OLAC Metadata Standard: Call for review

[Steven Bird]

On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 17:24, Ru-Yng Chang wrote:
> 1.
> I agree to include additional element or refinement under the DC element,
> too.  Giving an example in the document would be better.

We already include an example of a DC refinement in the document, for
the "alternative" refinement of the DC "title" element.

> 2.
> There are some inconsistent update dates between "Recommended metadata
> extensions" and each document of extension.
> eg.
> Code for Discourse Types(Recommended metadata extensions,
> http://www.language-archives.org/REC/olac-extensions.html)-- Date:
> 2002-11-21.
> OLAC Discourse Type
> Vocabulary(http://www.language-archives.org/REC/discourse.html)--Date
> issued: 2003-01-27

Right.  At present, the list of recommended extensions is only given a
new date when a new extension is added, not each time an extension is
updated.  We could agree to do this differently of course; however this
actually has no bearing on the metadata document itself.

> 3.
> Avoid reduplicating the vocabulary item of the OLAC extension and the
> third-party extension.
> The member of OLAC will be notified as soon as there is any change in the
> OLAC extension.

I think you're saying that any OLAC extension had better be an
extension, and not replicate OLAC vocabulary items.  However, I think
the comment at the end of section 5 handles this possibility:

  "[This] condition prevents extensions which ... copy an existing
  vocabulary with minor modifications or additions."

> 4.
> I have completed the Chinese translation for OLAC Metadata(2003-05-31) ,OLAC
> Linguistic Subject Vocabulary(2003-01-21), OLAC Linguistic Data Type
> Vocabulary(2002-12-12),
> but these documents have not yet been carefully proofread.
> I will continue to translate related documents into Chinese.

Wonderful - we'd be glad to host these on the OLAC site.

Thanks for your feedback on the metadata document.

-Steven Bird