- From: William Waites <ww@eris.okfn.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 20:10:01 +0100
- To: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: List for Working Group on Open Bibliographic Data <open-bibliography@lists.okfn.org>, public-lod@w3.org
(trimming the Cc a little bit but as Peter rightly points out we should probably trim it further for continued discussion) * [2010-11-22 17:33:33 +0000] Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk> écrit: ] Absolutely, though lets hope it's a random error and not something ] systematic. I went to download the file in question to have a look, but ] as it's a 450MB XML document, which Firefox is gallantly trying to load ] for me to read, I suspect I will fail. Any chance of these resources ] being offered as zip files? The cleaned record, which I would agree should not be deleted but superceded, can be retrieved as http://bnb.bibliographica.org/entry/GB97W9726.rdf So what do we do about this? If it won't appear in further corrected data from the BL, we should mint a new URI for it. This might be directly in bibliographica.org. The identifier/slug shouldn't be used because that's the BNB identifier. Easiest thing is just to make a hash. So if you do a search now you'll see two records for that book, the incorrect one from the original data and a hand-made one based on that record and what I could easily find with google. So the new record is at: http://bibliographica.org/entry/c4bb7da2c60413acc06f2369746da92b (anyone with a suggestion about how to make better identifiers please pipe up). As far as downloading the source data, I would suggest using wget(1). Cheers, -w -- William Waites http://eris.okfn.org/ww/foaf#i 9C7E F636 52F6 1004 E40A E565 98E3 BBF3 8320 7664
Received on Monday, 22 November 2010 19:10:35 UTC