Difference between revisions of "Metadata Dialects"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
m
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Metadata content can be approached in a variety of “dialects,” depending on the needs of specific user communities.  Though different, these languages also significantly overlap – as the “who, where, when, why, and how” must always be addressed, regardless of the community approach.  Thus, in reality, these differences in approach are more akin to dialects of a universal documentation language than multiple, disparate languages.  As such, for the purposes of this work, the term “metadata dialect” will refer to standardized metadata documentation approaches, in order to promote emphasis on universal documentation concepts as opposed to implementation of individual standards.
 
Metadata content can be approached in a variety of “dialects,” depending on the needs of specific user communities.  Though different, these languages also significantly overlap – as the “who, where, when, why, and how” must always be addressed, regardless of the community approach.  Thus, in reality, these differences in approach are more akin to dialects of a universal documentation language than multiple, disparate languages.  As such, for the purposes of this work, the term “metadata dialect” will refer to standardized metadata documentation approaches, in order to promote emphasis on universal documentation concepts as opposed to implementation of individual standards.
 
The following are some of the most common dialects used throughout the ESIP community.   
 
The following are some of the most common dialects used throughout the ESIP community.   
 
  
 
''Note:  While they are discussed independently, a dialect can use aspects of other dialects within its own — if the two dialects have the same/similar structure or the same file format.''
 
''Note:  While they are discussed independently, a dialect can use aspects of other dialects within its own — if the two dialects have the same/similar structure or the same file format.''

Revision as of 06:35, May 29, 2015

Metadata content can be approached in a variety of “dialects,” depending on the needs of specific user communities. Though different, these languages also significantly overlap – as the “who, where, when, why, and how” must always be addressed, regardless of the community approach. Thus, in reality, these differences in approach are more akin to dialects of a universal documentation language than multiple, disparate languages. As such, for the purposes of this work, the term “metadata dialect” will refer to standardized metadata documentation approaches, in order to promote emphasis on universal documentation concepts as opposed to implementation of individual standards. The following are some of the most common dialects used throughout the ESIP community.

Note: While they are discussed independently, a dialect can use aspects of other dialects within its own — if the two dialects have the same/similar structure or the same file format.