- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 07:23:15 -0700
- To: public-xg-lld@w3.org
+1 on Jodi's suggested wording. - kc Quoting Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider@deri.org>: > > On 22 Aug 2011, at 21:08, Antoine Isaac wrote: > >> >>>>> ===MORE HAS BEEN DONE ON VALUE VOCABULARIES AND ELEMENT SETS >>>>> THAN ON BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATASETS=== >>>>> 1) "Examples such the release of the British National >>>>> Bibliography show that there are indeed considerable >>>>> difficulties involved (many discussed in this report). However, >>>>> this proves not deterring enough, and the number of datasets >>>>> released as linked data keeps increasing at a fast pace." >>>>> >>>>> I think the difficulties need to either be directly mentioned, >>>>> or a report from the BNB mentioned; otherwise this stands as a >>>>> caution against adopting LLD. >>>> >>>> Like this one? >>>> http://consulting.talis.com/case-study/british-library-explores-linked-data/ >>> >>> I only skimmed this -- but my impression is that it's a bit >>> promotional and not very detailed. >> >> >> I also have this: >> http://www.slideshare.net/nw13/establishing-the-connection-creating-a-linked-data-version-of-the-bnb >> but it's a presentation... And I know no fully fledged report. > > From this I get the challenges as > * decreasing resources > * address multiple constituents (traditional libraries, researchers > wanting to data mine catalogs, linked data developers & users) > * licensing (get attribution while allowing wide reuse) > * collaborate with the user communities to determine appropriate > cross-domain formats > * existing staff (librarians rather than IT experts), data, and hardware > * new ways of thinking > * "legacy data wasn't designed for this purpose so starting can be > problematic" > * multiple options > * need careful thought for data modelling, sustainability > * need to be responsive to technical criticism > * steep learning curve > * iterative -- must be willing to make & learn from mistakes > > from slides 2, 8, 20, 21, 22 & 23 > > Based on this, I'd say this is far too negative: >>>>> "Examples such the release of the British National Bibliography >>>>> show that there are indeed considerable difficulties involved >>>>> (many discussed in this report). However, this proves not >>>>> deterring enough, and the number of datasets released as linked >>>>> data keeps increasing at a fast pace." > > > What about replacing this with: > "Examples such the release of the British National Bibliography show > that there is considerable work but also considerable benefit > involved in releasing bibliographic databases as Linked Data. As the > community's experience increases, the number of datasets released as > linked data keeps increasing at a fast pace." > > I think this presentation has a lot of useful info in it; I think > it's worth adding as a reference. Would that work? > >> >> >>> My point is that this sounds off-putting without giving any >>> details: "there are indeed considerable difficulties involved >>> (many discussed in this report)." Maybe the difficulties could be >>> enumerated, or otherwise referred to? >> >> >> Would using "challenges", as proposed by Karen, solve the issue? >> Honestly I don't remember what the list is: probably eliciting >> links to URIs from MARC records, finding a good data model... > > I made a list (above) from that presentation -- thanks, that was useful. > > -Jodi > >> >> >> >> Antoine >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Draft Vocabularies Datasets As Current Situation >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_Vocabularies_Datasets_As_Current_Situation&diff=5808&oldid=5779 >>>> >>>>> Draft Vocabularies Datasets Section2 >>>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_Vocabularies_Datasets_Section2&diff=5816&oldid=5796 >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks a lot! >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Antoine >>>> >>> >> >> > > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tuesday, 23 August 2011 14:23:44 UTC