2006-10-19 klockan 11:32 skrev Ross Burton: > On Thu, 2006-10-19 at 10:12 +0100, Jamie McCracken wrote: > > It also has fully extensible metadata and a desktop wide tag/keyword > > database so apps can use it to store all their metadata about any first > > class object (also kind of nice for integrating with the new G-VFS > > metadata handling) > > But the "extensible metadata" isn't really extendable is it. If I add a > new type Foo.Title, and then ask the tracker to search for a string in > titles, Foo.Title won't be searched. I have to wait for the Foo.Title > tag to be incorporated into the specification and the UI tools updated, > which makes it useless for indexing custom metadata. > > Also, if I search for "created by ross" how does the system need to know > that it should search File.Publisher, Audio.Artist, Audio.Performer, > Doc.Author and Image.Creator? The naming scheme here is inconsistant > and redundant. Although I admin not having looked into Tracker in great detail, I'm under the impression this is just a poor man's RDF-like [1] implementation that hits exactly the problems the Semantic Web standards are to solve in a well-defined and (imho) correct way. Regarding ontologies, why is this "metadata spec" not just Dublin Core [2] with additional properties for visual resources (audio and vide) from AVR [3] and EXIF? The metadata spec seems a very ad-hoc list of properties to me. Btw, I really dislike the word "tagging", which implies freeform annotations. In RDF speak: those annotations are just one single (anonymous) property only supporting literal values. mvrgr, Wouter [1] Or RDF, RDFS and OWL for that matter. [2] http://dublincore.org/ [3] http://www.vraweb.org/ and especially http://www.vraweb.org/vracore3.htm -- :wq mail uws xs4all nl web http://uwstopia.nl hold your breath :: count to ten :: fall apart :: start again -- placebo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature