- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:32:16 -0700
- To: public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>
The recommendations are broken into three major sections, one of which speaks to management actions that are needed. Of these, the first addresses costs and return on investment. The group felt that without some kind of cost benefit, it would be hard to make a good case for LLD. At the same time, we don't really have a good grasp of what our current practices cost us. Thuus: *Identify costs of current practices, and costs and ROI to moving of LLD* There must be some measurement of the relative costs of current library data practices and the potential of Linked Data to aid in making decisions about the future of library data. There are various areas of library metadata practices that could be studied, either separately or together. Among these are: * The relative costs of the Record v. statement approach: for editing by humans, as full record replacement in systems, and the capabilities for sharing * The use of text versus identifiers approach has costs: actual records must change when displays change (Cookery to Cooking); international cooperation requires extensive language mapping processes; some needed data elements must be extracted from textual field using algorithms, which also hinders sharing; and some library data formats require catalogers to duplicate information in the record, providing both textual fields and coded data for same information. --- Again, comments, suggestions, alternate ideas are all welcome. -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tuesday, 26 April 2011 17:32:45 UTC