Hi Rida,
[..snip..]
> however the metadata
> class should not be limited to one metadata standard example DublinCore, I
> think that metadata class should be extensible or generic to support
> multiple metadata standards.
The current Metadata class is extensible to support any metadata standard.
The existing interfaces that it implements are meant to be helper tools to
standardize the set of MetKeys when you actually want to use standard
metadata field names: however, it doesn't preclude the use of any Metadata
key field name that you'd like. In other words it supports both:
//example 1
Metadata m = new Metadata();
m.addMetadata(DC_TITLE, "Rida");
Just the same as it supports:
//example 2
Metadata m = new Metadata();
m.addMetadata("your_field_name_here", "Rida");
If it's determined that the set of "your_field_name_here" keys makes sense
and is in widespread use throughout the code, for convenience purposes, we
could create an interface:
public interface MyKeys{
public static final String YOUR_KEY_1 = "my_key_1";
//...
}
And then have the default Metadata class extend that interface:
public class Metadata implements DublinCore...,MyKeys{
// rest of code
}
But this isn't a requirement, and should only be done where it makes sense
to. Just wanted to clarify that.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Chris
______________________________________________
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cognizant Development Engineer
Early Detection Research Network Project
_________________________________________________
Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA
Office: 171-266B Mailstop: 171-246
_______________________________________________________
Disclaimer: The opinions presented within are my own and do not reflect
those of either NASA, JPL, or the California Institute of Technology.
