- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 13:19:51 -0700
- To: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>
- Cc: public-xg-lld@w3.org
You're welcome. And I like the example of providing a simple national bibliographic number. I was groping for an example like that but failed. Maybe you can make that edit in the wiki text? kc Quoting Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>: > Hi Karen, accentuating the positive definitely presents a better tone. > > One of the points I would like to emphasize here is that contributions > need not be as dramatic as supplying, say, authority data vs. > bibliographic data, but can be as mundane as simply providing a > national bibliography number or simply the title and author translated > into your local language, etc. I think that notion of the big picture > being comprised of seemingly innocuous atoms would help people realize > that they can actually participate in this environment. > > Your edits definitely make this much cleaner, thanks so much! > -Ross. > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote: >> Ross, I think the "one sentence" was a challenge, not a realistic >> expectation :-) >> >> I tried taking out some of the statements that people might see as >> "negative" (e.g. "very little to provide"): >> >> Another powerful outcome of the reuse of these unique identifiers is >> that it allows data providers to contribute portions of their data as >> statements. Under our >> current document-based ecosystem, data exchange is always in the form of >> entire records, >> which are presumed to be complete descriptions. >> In a graph-based architecture, however, >> an organization can supply individual statements >> about a resource, and all statements provided about a particular >> uniquely identified resource can be aggregated into the global graph. >> For example, libraries can contribute authoritative names apart from the >> full bibliographic description, and this can be used by others. At the same >> time, library services could accept statements from other sources, as >> they do today when they take in book cover images from outside services. In >> a >> linked data ecosystem, there is literally no contribution too small >> and it is this attribute that makes it possible for important >> connections to come from previously unknown of sources. >> >> a suggestion >> kc >> >> Quoting Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>: >> >>> Hi all, in the last conf call I was given an action to figure out a >>> way to incorporate the "essence" of the Stone Soup analogy (which was >>> clearly causing problems for people) into something more palatable. >>> The charge was to do it in a sentence -- I failed at one sentence, but >>> here's a paragraph I'm proposing for people to distill and wordsmith: >>> >>> <current_text> >>> By using globally unique identifiers to designate works, places, >>> people, events, subjects, and other objects or concepts of interest, >>> memory institutions allow resources to be cited across a broad range >>> of data sources and thus make their metadata descriptions more richly >>> accessible. The Web's Domain Name System assures stability and trust >>> by putting these identifiers into a regulated and well-understood >>> ownership and maintenance context. This is fully compatible with the >>> long-term mandate of memory institutions. Libraries, and memory >>> institutions generally, are in a unique position to provide trusted >>> metadata for resources of long-term cultural importance as data on the >>> Web. >>> </current_text> >>> <added_paragraph> >>> Another powerful outcome of the reuse of these unique identifiers is >>> that it allows data providers to contribute statements about >>> resources, even if they only have very little to provide. Under our >>> current document-based ecosystem, it is not efficient for >>> organizations that only know a fact or two about a given resource to >>> publish it; the host institution has a relatively useless metadata >>> record and consumers must devise ways of discovering, identifying and >>> integrating these statements. In a graph-based architecture, however, >>> there is no downside to an organization supplying anything they can >>> about a resource, since all statements provided about a particular >>> uniquely identified resource aggregate into the global graph. In a >>> linked data ecosystem, there is literally no contribution too small >>> and it is this attribute that makes it possible for important >>> connections to come from the unlikeliest of sources. >>> </added_paragraph> >>> >>> Thanks! >>> -Ross. >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Karen Coyle >> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net >> ph: 1-510-540-7596 >> m: 1-510-435-8234 >> skype: kcoylenet >> >> >> > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Monday, 22 August 2011 20:20:52 UTC