I think I understand now. I don't have a definitive answer, but I can offer you my point of view.
You are trying to define different schemata for different oraganizational units. A more natural fit in dspace would be to do this at the namespace level (the first part, which we wrongly call "schema"). So IMHO, a more natural fit for DSpace would be: org-group1.subject org-group2.subject You may want to consult this on dspace-general or with DCAT, who are currently dealing with this kind of thing and may offer better advice. Regards, ~~helix84 Compulsory reading: DSpace Mailing List Etiquette https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Mailing+List+Etiquette On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Alan Orth <alan.o...@gmail.com> wrote: > Helix, > > Perhaps it was a poor example. As a sysadmin I of course abhor www as well, > but it was an easy example to illustrate DNS hierarchy; "mail.example.org." > would have worked as well for demonstration purposes. :) > > To clarify, I'm naturally more comfortable with a format like this: > > org.group1.subject > org.group2.subject > > Where "org" is a large, common parent organization, and group1 and group2 > are autonomous groups in this organization. Each group will have their own > special, non-overlapping subjects, special terminology, authors, etc. > > The alternative, as my librarian suggests, is: > > org.subject.group1 > org.subject.group2 > > Are there any technical merits to using one convention over the other? We > had previously been polluting DC with things like dc.xzysubject.subject, > which is what we want to move away from. > > Thanks, > > Alan > > > On 07/18/2013 11:13 AM, helix84 wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Alan Orth <alan.o...@gmail.com> wrote: > > org.subject.example > org.subject.example2 > > Hi Alan, > > this is the principle behind Dublin Core, which the DSpace metadata > schema is generally based on. The second part from the left (element) > is less specific, while the third one (qualifier) is more specific. > > Since DNS and LDAP use the same principle, I don't really see how you > came up with the first one. If that's based on "www" being the same > value in the third part from the left, there's no real reason for > that. A web server FQDN doesn't really have to start with "www" (and > arguably shouldn't, see e.g. no-www.org for reasons), so I see this > particular convention more as a coincidence than a rule. > > Just to make sure, can you give a specific example of such metadata in > your repository? > > Regards, > ~~helix84 > > Compulsory reading: DSpace Mailing List Etiquette > https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Mailing+List+Etiquette > > > -- > Alan Orth > alan.o...@gmail.com > http://alaninkenya.org > http://mjanja.co.ke > "I have always wished for my computer to be as easy to use as my telephone; > my wish has come true because I can no longer figure out how to use my > telephone." -Bjarne Stroustrup, inventor of C++ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds. Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48808831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ DSpace-tech mailing list DSpace-tech@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-tech List Etiquette: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Mailing+List+Etiquette
