On 10/1/2013 10:43 AM, Christoph, Pascal wrote:
<snip>
> If you had not only linked data, but linked "open" data, you are allowed to
> build up your own service with the data. Thus you have mirrors. For us, we have
> such an internal mirror of e.g. the German authority file GND and the German
> ZDB Isil authority file . Thus, in principle, there is no "single point of
> failure"[1].
>
> [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_point_of_failure
</snip>
Yes, and Jorge also makes a good point about problems in politically
troubled areas. It seems that linked data must be associated with "open"
and "mirrored" as you mention. Not only does it have to be open for
general download, perusal and experimentation, it also needs to be
mirrored and that involves money and resources. That part of linked data
hasn't been discussed all that much, that I have seen. Also, if the data
is not open, everything can be controlled.
So, one part of a linked data system could demand that you pay for
access to their data. For instance, what if Google Maps started charging
hefty prices to use their API? That would stop a tremendous number of
projects. We just hope they don't. In library records, the less critical
parts, e.g. comments from Amazon, book-covers from Google, ratings from
LibraryThing, you could say, "Who cares?" but if you take away the
headings on catalog records, you are taking away about 95% of their value.
--
James Weinheimer weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com
First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus
Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Received on Tue Oct 01 2013 - 07:16:33 EDT