On 5/22/07, Ross Singer <ross.singer_at_library.gatech.edu> wrote:
> The point, though, is the /potential/ of RDF, not the existing
> practice in libraries.
Ah, well, then I guess it's all unproven. :)
> RDF allows us to use URIs to point to other data.
let's look at Z39.50, for a second. You can point to any Z39.50
repository doing the same thing. RDF in this case replaces the
repository and credentials with an URI, because, frankly, you can do
MARC <-> RDF <-MARC> easily enough. I'd never thought I'd see the day
I'd point to Z39.50 as anything but an example of things done poorly,
but seriously, a repository is a repository is a repository. :)
What RDF can do is to make the metadata itself available not to
library systems but to *users* who wants to reuse them for whatever
purpose. However, you can do this through a number of channels, such
as Atom feeds, microformat / Coin's, plain XML dumps, etc.
People need to realize what RDF *is* ; it's a simple relational
uni-directional triplet-based (or semi-quad if you count anonymous
nodes, which you shouldn't because they're the work of the devil!)
data model and expression language. if this is a model your tools can
/ want to work with, then Great! If not, there are alternatives.
> So, rather than
> shoehorning everything we might need into one record (regardless of
> whether or not it's the most appropriate format for that data), we can
> disseminate the data over various records (say, authority, or holdings
> or whatever new data or local data we want to include) without having
> to shove it into the bibliographic record itself.
Centralizing knowledge in one blob (one record) have both advantages
and disadvantages, so I do not believe that RDF'ing necessarily solves
the big problems we're discussing. (I don't know if you've played
around with RDF parsers, but I can promise you that they solve some
things and create other problems ...)
> The use of URIs
> give us absolute identifiers, so we're not matching on user entered
> strings.
The persistant qualities of URI's are heavily disputed, even in the
RDF diehard camp. Mix in the PSI notions from Topic Maps, and then you
might get something good. (Yes, you can do both)
Alexander
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchymist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------
Received on Tue May 22 2007 - 19:19:03 EDT