Only if you create your own guidelines for your own data. As I said, it's just like MARC 300$a: "300 p.", "300 pages", "300 pages", "three hundred pages", and "1 volume (300 pages)" are all equivalent in MARC. Extent was not designed for computer parsing.
The DCMI documentation for extent says, "Recommended practice is to specify the file size in megabytes and duration in ISO 8601 format", but doesn't give any guidance for string encoding scheme for those dimensions, nor any guidance at all for other dimensions. It's possible that someone has written suggested guidelines for certain purposes.
Steve McDonald
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Eric Lease Morgan
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 11:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] using dublin core to express size measured in words
On Oct 18, 2021, at 11:20 AM, McDonald, Stephen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Using Dublin Core, is there a way to express size measured in words?
>
> I believe that the value would be "100 MB" rather than "100". The units are part of the value in extent; it has no meaning without the units. <dcterms:extent> is equivalent to the 300$a in MARC--a text string specifying the extent, including units.
>
> --
> Steve McDonald
Okay, thank you, then I might write:
<dc:format>
<dcterms:extent>
<rdf:value>100 MB</rdf:value>
<rdfs:label>100 MB (compressed)</rdfs:label>
</dcterms:extent>
</dc:format>
But if I use such an expression, then a computer must parse "100 MB" to denote the units, but computers are stupid and people are inconsistent. This leads to issues because the following are equivalent:
* 100 MB
* 100 MB
* 100 megabytes
* 100 mega-bytes
* 100000000 bytes
* 100,000,000 bytes
Is there a more explicit, less ambiguous way to denote units?
--
Eric Morgan
