-----Original Message-----
>From: Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_JHU.EDU>
>So, decisions about metadata in LibraryThing's universe can be made for
>a very particular application---"LibraryThing's social system and the
>features that depend on it." In the library world, many of us are
>assuming that we don't have a very particular and defined application
>for our metadata, but that instead we are trying to design metadata as
>flexibly as possible, to support many (any?) application, both ones we
>can think of now and ones we will think of in the future.
>
I think we need to distinguish between the development of a metadata standard and the creation of a metadata instance. Our standard needs to be very flexible, but actual uses could serve very particular and defined applications WITHOUT breaking the metadata model. There is no reason why the metadata in a law library and the metadata in an art department slide collection should be the same in terms of content. There is a good reason why they should use compatible structures so that, for example, records from either could be pulled into a course management system. I actually think that a rigorous metadata model will allow us to create more useful records that have less content in common. There has been a tremendous struggle in the non-book area to try to use cataloging rules and a machine-readable format that was primarily developed for textual materials. These folks could finally be freed to create the records that serve their users best.
kc
Karen Coyle - on the Road
kcoyle_at_kcoyle.net
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Wed May 23 2007 - 04:50:47 EDT