Subject: Re: [sacm] [sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology] Propose to remove the term metadata from the draft. (#66)

From: adammontville <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2018 17:59:03 +0000 (UTC)

Thankfully (?), we are talking about a terminology draft, which is more aligned with an ontological perspective than one tied to a specific information or data model. Back to the original question: Do we, or do we not, keep the term *metadata*? It is already broken out into definition followed by exposition, so we could simply leave it, but as John pointed out we might want to clean up the expositional text to something more effective than: 

> In the SACM information model, data is referred to as Content. Metadata about the content is referred to as Content-Metadata, respectively. Content and Content-Metadata are combined into Subjects called Content-Elements in the SACM information model. Some information elements defined by the SACM information model can be part of the Content or the Content-Metadata. Therefore, if an information element is considered data or data about data depends on which kind of Subject it is associated with. The SACM information model also defines metadata about the data origin via the Subject Statement-Metadata. Typical examples of metadata are time stamps, data origin or data source.

John or @henkbirkholz if you have proposed text for the expositional replacement, please provide it.

-- 
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/66#issuecomment-355621861