That's a good idea. CKAN has mainly been a gathering place for "data sets" (broadly defined), but it would be a logical place to also gather ontologies. Among the "data sets" are already some vocabularies, like LCSH, which fall into the middle ground between vocabularies and data that we've struggled with in the LLD draft document. I wonder if it would be better to have a separate section for ontologies, or to mix them together but use an icon or keyword to make it easy to pick them out? kc Quoting "todd.d.robbins@gmail.com" <todd.d.robbins@gmail.com>: > The CKAN LLD Group <http://ckan.net/group/lld> could at least fill a certain > aspect of that need for the time being. > > Tod Robbins > MLIS 2012 > Information School > University of Washington > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenetReceived on Tuesday, 12 July 2011 22:35:24 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:19:03 UTC