discussion of the Creative Commons Metadata work

[Mike Linksvayer <ml AT creativecommons.org>]

Evan Prodromou wrote:
>     ML> The format is identical -- RDF/XML, and CC uses many DC
>     ML> properties [...].
>
> No, it's not identical. It's close, but not quite. A couple of things:

Ok, I was trying to be sneaky by implying that since they both use 
RDF/XML, they use same format.  You're correct about the differences below.

>     * The metadata for a work in DC is an rdf:Description; in CC, it's
>       a Work.
>     * The CC metadata has a Licence element; in DC, I believe this
>       would just be another rdf:Description.

cc:Work and cc:License allow for more precise semantics than 
rdf:Description.  See <http://web.resource.org/cc/schema.rdf> where the 
various license characteristic properties are defined to have a domain 
of License.

Another difference/addition is that of cc:license.  Presumably CC 
could've used dc:rights rather than subclassing it.

cc:Agent is another addition, and one I'm not satisfied with, which is 
why I've mentioned adopting foaf:Agent in the past -- I'm still planning 
to do that, though I'm kind of waiting to see what the DC Agents working 
group comes up with (there's been a recent requirements document, to 
which a few people responded "hey, look at FOAF", including me privately).

I welcome commentary on any of the above, though of course widely 
deployed stuff is much less likely to change.

--
  Mike Linksvayer
  http://creativecommons.org/learn/aboutus/people#21