jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rolf Kulemann <r...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Public NodeType Library (pntl)
Date Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:21:01 GMT
On Sun, 2004-10-31 at 10:41, David Nuescheler wrote:
> hi stefano
> > In respect to JCR, there are few important things to say:
> >   1) don't try to approach semantic interoperability across different
> > containers. this is not your job, and this is not the right place, just
> > focus on what you need to have done in order to make your life easier.
> >   2) don't care about semantic interoperability but *DO CARE* about
> > unique identification of concepts. Unique identification is the
> > foundation of symbolic representation. In short, this means: use
> > namespaces and use good future-proof technology/vendor-neutral URIs for
> > them as much as possible.
> >   3) don't overspecify: do the simplest thing that get your job done and
> > allow others to do the same.
> sounds great.
> > my strong suggestion would be to use Dublin Core as a starting point for
> > extrinsic metadata about objects.
> yep, forgot about that... (scrap my prior suggestions)
> dc sounds like a perfect starting point for meta-data to me. 
> thanks.

Interesting discussion here. I have to admit I'm not a semantic web
profi, but we/I in Lenya land have the idea to describe things like
workflow (and maybe other parts) with, eh, ontologies. We then would use
those _conceptual_ metadata to describe workflow of documents.

This is just a draft idea maybe only living in my head, and I'm not sure
if we should attach the wf meta data direct to document nodes or keep
them separate. We aren't that far in that discussion, yet.

I'm curious about your opinions, if my idea is totally silly or if you
guys think it is a worthwhile approach to follow.

Rolf Kulemann

View raw message