On May 22, 2007, at 9:39 PM, Riley, Jenn wrote:
> Sarah Shreeves of UIUC and I have been promoting recently the idea of
> "shareable metadata" - that which is intelligible and useful in
> metadata
> aggregations. We start from the notion that Carl Lagoze championed in
> the early days of DC that all metadata is a *view* of a resource -
> that
> it isn't possible to create a usage-neutral metadata record. Our
> thinking here is that we don't have to design a view for every single
> application, but that we can present a different view for every major
> *class* of applications - a Google-style view, and OAIster/OAI-PMH
> style
> view, a collection registry-style view, etc. I think we have a ways to
> go before we fully understand what those fundamental views are and
> what
> metadata they should contain, but it seems to me that a happy medium
> between designing for every single application and designing for one
> single application is the way we should be thinking about this.
Cool idea. sarah_shreeves++, jenn_riley++, and carl_lagoze++.
We are past the time of the lowest common denominator. Different
views -- classes of applications -- seem to make a lot of sense to
me. A "view" for the scholar. A "view" for the novice. A "view" for
librarians. A "view" for one computer system, and another "view" for
another computer system. Very flexible.
One size does not fit all.
--
Eric Lease Morgan
University Libraries of Notre Dame
Received on Tue May 22 2007 - 20:23:27 EDT