<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: [mapguide-dev] Metadata</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>As an addendum, this page is an interesting
read:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2><A
href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Geodata_Metadata_Requirements">http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Geodata_Metadata_Requirements</A></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>... though it doesn't speak to ISO metadata standards at
all.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=115032620-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Jason</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Jason Birch [@nanaimo.ca] <BR><B>Sent:</B>
Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:57<BR><B>To:</B>
dev@mapguide.osgeo.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [mapguide-dev]
Metadata<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>It sounds like you've given this considerable thought,
which is reassuring :)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>In my ideal world, metadata would be modelled using
the superset of entities and attributes required by the ISO and FGDC standards,
with the potential to be expanded to cover other elements that are required but
not present in these standards. From this model, you would not rely on the
standards other than to define the required elements for each schema.
You could also allow organisations to define their own profiles; subsets of
required elements that cover their internal business needs. These would
all be entered through a common interface, and could then be output via
something akin to an XSLT transformation or database views that formats
them into the desired standard XML output, which could in turn be transformed
into HTML for display.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>The data could also be accessed by
various transport-level services, such as </FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>CSW (<A
href="http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/cat">http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/cat</A>)
or Z39.50 and its successor SRU/SRW (<A
href="http://www.loc.gov/standards/">http://www.loc.gov/standards/</A>), as well
as front end applications such as a spatial discovery portal akin to ESRI's
Geography Network or a simple Google-like plain text
query.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>The main benefits of this
approach are:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>- support all standards without forcing the client to
choose one or the other</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>- avoid having to implement a new data
entry/storage/display framework for each standard</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>- leverage strengths of a relational model for
maintaining common attributes such as organisation and person contact
details</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>This will also remove a disincentive to marriage, thus
strengthening family values. (I don't want to change my name, because I'm
going to have to go through and update all of my contact details in the
metadata). :)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>I don't see this as orthogonal to the current design path,
but I don't know that it's entirely in alignment either.
Your implementation provides a storage mechanism for metadata, and my
ideal would be to provide a metadata service. Perhaps these could be
combined somehow, by making resources types for each of the metadata tables
(MetadataOrganisation, MetadataPerson, MetadataPhone, etc) and then using the
calls that you have provided to return a resource-specific aggregation
of these metadata resources, formatted in the well known
XML standard of choice ???</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=478455617-19092006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff size=2>Jason</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><FONT size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>