Re: Publication of scientific research

On the face of it, I agree as well. But as someone who's made an entire career out of CORRECTING the horrid metadata that publishers already provide for PHYSICAL products, I'd have to say there's an opportunity for a lot of ontologists and taxonomists to provide services here. Publishers are weirdly bad about describing their own content.

On Apr 25, 2013, at 9:37 AM, "Michael Hopwood" <michael@editeur.org> wrote:

> " It looks like a (modern) role for publishers could be to actually put order in metadata provided by  users."
> 
> As metadata librarian (apparently they used to call this "cataloguing") now working halfway between publishing and cultural heritage, I can only second this.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrea Splendiani [mailto:andrea.splendiani@iscb.org] 
> Sent: 25 April 2013 13:37
> To: Kingsley Idehen
> Cc: Ivan Herman; public-lod@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Publication of scientific research
> 
> 
> Yes another bit, I was just wondering: are we sure that authors embedding metadata in their papers is the best way to go ? They surely know most about their data, but may get shorts of standards and even have some bias. It looks like a (modern) role for publishers could be to actually put order in metadata provided by  users.
> 
> best,
> Andrea 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 25 April 2013 13:44:07 UTC