Link metadata to semantics #7
Conversation
| @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| > “Data that provides information about other data” \[[wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata)] | |||
|
|
|||
| Metadata is defined as data about data. It gives context to the data it describes. Although this is a complete definition of what metadata is, it is not specific enough for most people. So, it can be useful to refine the idea of metadata to more specific subsets: [schemas][schema.md], [vocabularies][vocabulary.md], and ontologies[ontology.md]. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"Metadata is defined as data about data." is an almost direct repeat of the main definition line above (“Data that provides information about other data” with its citation).
I think the comment "Although this is a complete definition of what metadata is, it is not specific enough for most people." is probably too subjective to be useful here.
Finally, whilst a schema, vocabulary or ontology reference might be one part of the metadata associated with a data object, and whilst an instance in an ontology would contain metadata, these things are far from being conceptually similar to metadata in their own right, so I think this is very confusing to be honest.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can't think of any metadata that can't be classified as vocabulary, schema, or an ontology. Curious if you have an example in mind. In fact, without one of these three classifications, it seems like a piece of data could not be metadata, as it could not be related to another set of data.
No description provided.