Hola,
Peter Schlumpf <pschlumpf_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Time to
> come up with a mapping system to transport the data contained in it, throw
> that old mess out the window and start over again!
There's some good stuff happening in the RDF world of mapping FRBR
with RDA rules (I think? Karen?) which, if we all got involved in,
would change things for the better.
However, the data exchange format is only a small sliver of a larger
problem, because even though RDF will solve some problems it will
*not* solve the problems of the data itself. Changing the containers
doesn't make the contents turn to gold. There's a lot of work to be
done in cleaning up what you've got, including perhaps the no-go job
of *removing* some stuff, do stuff differently, or not at all. And
most importantly, add something new in.
You need to get information into the "records" about stuff that a) is
relevant to the container, and b) relevant to its contents, and c)
relevant to its surroundings, or, in bibliographic terms, relevant to
the cover, to the contents and its reader.
There's that word again; relevant. And I assert that to understand
what that word truly means, you need to put some heavy thinking caps
on because it does *not* mean "business as usual." An aside thats
really smack on topic is the question; what are you guys doing for
cataloging full-text items? What are you doing for cataloging
knowledge fragments? What are you doing for making relationships
between those items? And how do you and your system identify the
items?
Solve those riddles, and the rest will be easy. :)
Kind regards,
Alex
--
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
--- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
Received on Mon Apr 19 2010 - 18:14:10 EDT