Public Review ends: 6 February 2012
From the post:
The ISA programme of the European Commission launched the public review of the Asset Description Metadata Schema (ADMS) on 6 January 2012 this will end on 6 February 2012 (inclusive).
From mid 2012, the Joinup platform, of the ISA programme, will make available a large number of semantic interoperability assets, described using ADMS, through a federation of asset repositories of Member States, standardisation bodies and other relevant stakeholders.
Apologies for the late notice but this item just came to my attention.
This is version 0.8 so unless the EC uses Hadoop numbering practices (jumping from 0.22 to 1.0) and such, I suspect there will be additional opportunities to comment.
ADMS 0.8 (has the following files):
At least as of today, 4 February 2012, the following two files don’t require you to answer if you are willing to participate in a post-download survey. I know every marketing department thinks their in-house and amateurish surveys are meaningful. Not. Ask a professional survey group if you really want to do surveys. Expensive but at least they will be meaningful.
These five (5) files require you to register and accept the post-download survey or answer: “No, I prefer to remain anonymous – start the download immediately.” five (5) times.
The ADMS_Specification-v0.8.zip file contains ADMS_Specification-v0.8.pdf (which is listed above).
The specification document is thirty-five (35) pages long so it won’t take you long to read.
I was puzzled by the documentation note (dcterms:abstract) in the adms08.rdf file that reads:
ADMS is intended as a model that facilitates federation and co-operation. It is not the primary intention that repository owners redesign or convert their current systems and data to conform to ADMS, but rather that ADMS can act as a common layer among repositories that want to exchange data.
But the examples found in ADMS_Examples-v0.8.zip are dated variously, 2011 – ADMS_Examples_Digitaliser_v0.03.pdf, 2010 – ADMS_Examples_ADMS_v0.03.pdf, ADMS_Examples_DCMES_v0.03.pdf, 2009 – ADMS_Examples_SKOS_v0.04.pdf, with version numbers, v0.03 and v.0.04 that leave doubt about the examples being current with the specification draft.
Morever, the examples are contrary to the goal of ADMS in that they represent presentation of data in ADMS rather than using ADMS as a target vocabulary. In other words, if you are a target vocabulary, give target vocabulary examples.
Do you have a feeling of deja vu reading these documents? Been here, done that? Which projects would you name off the top of your head that cover some, all or more than the ground covered here? (Extra points if you look up citations/URLs.)
Shameless self-promotion follows if you want to stop reading here.
It doesn’t look like my editing schedule is full for this year. Ghost or public editing of documentation or standards available. ODF 1.2 is an example of what is possible with a dedicated technical team like Sun had at Hamburg backing me as an editor. It is undergoing revision but no standard or document is ever perfect. Anyone who says differently is mis-informed or lying.