- From: Emmanuelle Bermes <manue@figoblog.org>
- Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 07:53:49 +0200
- To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: public-lld@w3.org
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 7:04 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: > Nice and concise, Jeff. +1 ! > > I wonder, though, about our focus for this section and for the vocabularies > section. The latter mixes LLD and BLD (B = bibliographic). If we agree > that's a good scope then we should bring the "B" word into the report early > on. I think it would be hard to separate library and bibliographic, > especially when we are talking about linked data where the two will > presumably blend together in actual use. > > The tools here seem to be general SemWeb tools, so to include these in our > report we need to give a reason why they are here. You're right on this, Karen. In the 1st place, we thought of including a "tools" section because it's something that is needed and asked for by the community. Maybe its place is not in the report, though. This very interesting starting point created by Jeff could be considered as a preview of what we recommend be elaborated - a list of tools that can help create LLD. It's also probably possible to state that one "requirement" for LLD is that tools are available. A possible recommendation could be to evaluate these tools, and check if they need be adapted for LLD. Also, maybe a better sense of what "tools" are expected is needed. I suspect that people asking for tools in the library community are more or less hoping that we will point them to a ready-made "marc-2-rdf" converter, or a GUI for cataloguing books as triples, or even an rdf-based OPAC. Not sure that developper tools will seem relevant to them, what do you think ? Should we point in the report to experiments like Lukas' [1] or initiatives like eXtensible Catalog [2] ? Emma [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011Apr/0069.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-xg-lld/2011Apr/0034.html I don't know of any > specific LLD tools, does anyone?. (The closest I can think of is the Open > Metadata Registry, which has an input interface to RDA and other library > vocabularies, but it also includes non-library vocabularies.) We could say > that "tools are tools" and we don't have/expect LLD-specific tools, or we > could say that LLD-specific tools will be built on these tools... > > kc > > Quoting "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>: > >> Here's a rough draft of the Relevant Technologies section that I >> promised. It looks like the W3C keeps good lists of tools for several of >> these categories, so I deferred to them whenever possible. >> >> >> >> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Draft_Relevant_Technologies >> >> >> >> Comments, suggestions, and elaborations are welcome. >> >> >> >> Jeff >> >> >> >> --- >> >> Jeffrey A. Young >> Software Architect >> OCLC Research, Mail Code 410 >> OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. >> 6565 Kilgour Place >> Dublin, OH 43017-3395 >> www.oclc.org <http://www.oclc.org> >> >> Voice: 614-764-4342 >> Voice: 800-848-5878, ext. 4342 >> Fax: 614-718-7477 >> Email: jyoung@oclc.org <mailto:jyoung@oclc.org> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > ph: 1-510-540-7596 > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet > > >
Received on Monday, 18 April 2011 05:54:19 UTC