- From: Ted Thibodeau Jr <tthibodeau@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:40:42 -0500
- To: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: Matthias Samwald <samwald@gmx.at>, public-lod@w3.org
* On Nov 20, 2008, at 07:27 AM, Richard Light wrote:
> However, my biggest query is about people - in a museum/historical
> context,
> you're talking about all the people who ever lived, whether famous
> or not.
> I could invent URIs for each person mentioned in the Wordsworth
> Trust data,
> and publish those, but then they would be locked into a single silo
> with no
> prospect of interoperability with any other museum's personal data.
> Mapping
> names across thousands of museum triple stores is not a scalable
> option.
>
> So ... is there a case for "deadpeople.org", a site which does for
> historical
> people what Geonames does for place names? ("dead" = "no data
> protection
> issues": I'm not just being macabre.) The site should expect a
> constant
> flood of new people (and should issue a unique URI for each as it
> creates
> the central record), but should also allow queries against existing
> entries,
> so that the matching process can happen on a case-by-case basis in a
> central
> place, rather than being done after the event.
There are many who question their motives and the actions they take
based on
the data they collect, but ...
The LDS (Mormons, Church of Jesus Chris of Latter Day Saints, pick-a-
name) has
the motivation, the budget, the network and equipment infrastructure,
etc., to
collect and maintain this, as part of their large project of being
*the* place
for genealogical research and information.
If nothing else, I would think they could be enlisted to help create
the right
ontology, and the large central registry.
Be seeing you,
Ted
Received on Saturday, 22 November 2008 09:41:34 UTC