| Draft
categorisation (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| – | Earliest schemas
were largely conceptual |
|||||||||||||||
| in nature: |
||||||||||||||||
| – | e.g. Pittsburgh
BAC model, Cedars outline |
|||||||||||||||
| specification,
OCLC/RLG WG I |
||||||||||||||||
| – | Gradually moving
towards a more |
|||||||||||||||
| practical focus: |
||||||||||||||||
| – | e.g., VERS,
NLNZ, METS, OCLC/RLG WG II |
|||||||||||||||
| (Implementation
Strategies) |
||||||||||||||||
| – | Based on XML
(DTDs and Schemas) |
|||||||||||||||
| – | But there is an
urgent need for this |
|||||||||||||||
| experience to be
shared |
||||||||||||||||
| – | e.g., briefing
papers, advice to implementers |
|||||||||||||||
