W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > August 2011

Re: comments from a readthrough of the whole report

From: Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:48:07 +0100
Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org
Message-Id: <4F272F6B-8E97-473D-A42B-4FEF1C6857F7@deri.org>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@FEW.VU.NL>

On 22 Aug 2011, at 21:08, Antoine Isaac wrote:

> 
>>>> ===MORE HAS BEEN DONE ON VALUE VOCABULARIES AND ELEMENT SETS THAN ON BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATASETS===
>>>> 1) "Examples such the release of the British National Bibliography show that there are indeed considerable difficulties involved (many discussed in this report). However, this proves not deterring enough, and the number of datasets released as linked data keeps increasing at a fast pace."
>>>> 
>>>> I think the difficulties need to either be directly mentioned, or a report from the BNB mentioned; otherwise this stands as a caution against adopting LLD.
>>> 
>>> Like this one?
>>> http://consulting.talis.com/case-study/british-library-explores-linked-data/
>> 
>> I only skimmed this -- but my impression is that it's a bit promotional and not very detailed.
> 
> 
> I also have this:
> http://www.slideshare.net/nw13/establishing-the-connection-creating-a-linked-data-version-of-the-bnb
> but it's a presentation... And I know no fully fledged report.

From this I get the challenges as
* decreasing resources
* address multiple constituents (traditional libraries, researchers wanting to data mine catalogs, linked data developers & users)
* licensing (get attribution while allowing wide reuse)
* collaborate with the user communities to determine appropriate cross-domain formats
* existing staff (librarians rather than IT experts), data, and hardware
* new ways of thinking
* "legacy data wasn't designed for this purpose so starting can be problematic"
* multiple options
* need careful thought for data modelling, sustainability
* need to be responsive to technical criticism
* steep learning curve
* iterative -- must be willing to make & learn from mistakes

from slides 2, 8, 20, 21, 22 & 23

Based on this, I'd say this is far too negative:
>>>> "Examples such the release of the British National Bibliography show that there are indeed considerable difficulties involved (many discussed in this report). However, this proves not deterring enough, and the number of datasets released as linked data keeps increasing at a fast pace."


What about replacing this with:
"Examples such the release of the British National Bibliography show that there is considerable work but also considerable benefit involved in releasing bibliographic databases as Linked Data. As the community's experience increases, the number of datasets released as linked data keeps increasing at a fast pace."

I think this presentation has a lot of useful info in it; I think it's worth adding as a reference. Would that work?

> 
> 
>> My point is that this sounds off-putting without giving any details: "there are indeed considerable difficulties involved (many discussed in this report)." Maybe the difficulties could be enumerated, or otherwise referred to?
> 
> 
> Would using "challenges", as proposed by Karen, solve the issue? Honestly I don't remember what the list is: probably eliciting links to URIs from MARC records, finding a good data model...

I made a list (above) from that presentation -- thanks, that was useful.

-Jodi

> 
> 
> 
> Antoine
> 
> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Draft Vocabularies Datasets As Current Situation
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_Vocabularies_Datasets_As_Current_Situation&diff=5808&oldid=5779
>>> 
>>>> Draft Vocabularies Datasets Section2
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_Vocabularies_Datasets_Section2&diff=5816&oldid=5796
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks a lot!
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> 
>>> Antoine
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2011 10:48:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 23 August 2011 10:48:38 GMT