tdwg / ac

Audiovisual Core
http://www.tdwg.org/standards/638
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
11 stars 6 forks source link

3D terms Proposal: new dc:type term and new ac terms #243

Open magpiedin opened 2 years ago

magpiedin commented 2 years ago

The 3D Task groups is proposing the addition of a new dc:type term "3D Digital Resource" and two AC terms ac:3DResourceType and ac:captureModality (definition linked below), with the following rationale:

Proposed vocabulary and term additions.

We propose a vocabulary addition to dc:type. Specifically the word "3D Resource" or "3D Digital Resource" is needed as 3D resources are a class unto themselves not strictly fitting under the definition of any other words: e.g., "data" or "image" are not sufficient as justified below.

In addition, we propose two Audubon Core terms with controlled vocabularies to qualify and categorize the nature of a given 3D resource: ac:3DResourceType and ac:captureModality.

Why not an existing dc or ac term?

Existing terms dc:type and ac:subtype use controlled vocabularies that do not allow adequate categorization and description of 3D resources. The proposed terms are also contrasted with definitions for dc:format and ac:resourceCreationTechnique, which are similarly limited. Our justification for adding new fields to more easily distinguish among the variety of 3D resource types is as follows:

dc:type Two of the DCMI Type Vocabulary terms used in dc:type, “Image” and “Dataset”, fit some, but not all, 3D resource types.

ac:subtype

dc:format

ac:resourceCreationTechnique

New Term Details

ac:3DResourceType

ac:captureModality

Term Notes:

AdamRountrey commented 2 years ago

There are indeed some problems associated with the current dc:type options for 3D data. Users with 3D data to characterize with Dublin Core have no clear guidance on dc:type, and 3D data is a category that end users may be seeking exclusively. Currently, a metadata creator could more or less justifiably characterize a 3D mesh as an "image", a "dataset", or an "interactive resource", and the multiple potential characterizations could make it difficult for end users to find appropriate 3D resources.

I think that most general-purpose repositories use "dataset" for 3D data. To reduce the potential use of "image" or "interactive resource", perhaps we should also see if DCMI would be willing to explicitly mention 3D data as an example for "dataset"?