Sharing Knowledge: Scientific Communication - SSOAR

164 Judith Plümer
based on a few perl scripts that have no influence on the performance of the machine.
If someone ran an extra broker for each MSC classification, the performance
of the system would decrease drastically.
Obviously the broker component is independent of the used metadata scheme
and the offered kind of material which are preprints in this example. The same
methods of retrieval work for any kind of documents enriched with metadata. .
In the following we will discuss the advantages of RDF as a format for storing
metadata in MPRESS and how the system can migrate.
RDF compared to HTML META
We don’t want to discuss the general advantages of the Resource Description
Framework RDF (http://www.w3.org/RDF/) [Brickley, 2001] here. We just
want to give an impression of what the difference implies for a system like
MPRESS.
RDF stores information in units of statements consisting of Subject, Predicate
and Object. The combination of statements results in complex graphs that can
be expressed in RDF. HTML META stores only attribute/value or NAME/
CONTENT pairs. Or in the notion of RDF it stores Predicates and Objects so
that the subject is thought of being the document itself.
An example of the difference between HTML META and RDF in MPRESS
is the presentation of two authors of a paper and their email adresses.
In HTML this would look like:
In the XML presentation of RDF it looks like:
Marie
Mustermann