I just want to add that based on my experience, what Karen is saying is exactly right and truly reflects what I've heard and experienced and what I think needs to happen.
[Management Consulting Services]
E: [log in to unmask]
On Jan 15, 2013, at 10:51 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> I think it's important to think of bibliographic data with a broader scope than libraries, much less Bibframe. Bibliographic data is one of the more common types of data that is used widely in a variety of contexts. There are efforts around bib data that come out of publishing, out of "ad hoc" academic efforts, in retail, etc. If we don't think about this bigger world, libraries will end up once again in a silo that is of use only to libraries.
> Note that W3C already sponsored an effort to encourage libraries to think of their data in the Web context . I'm not sure that it has had that effect (yet). But we really should not create a new bibliographic framework without thinking about:
> - how other communities might use the data libraries create
> - how libraries might use the data that other communities create
> - how library data can interact usefully with data created by other communities
> It is my impression that the Zepheira vision tries to address these issues, but I'm not sure that the US library world is on board. Some non-US library communities, including the German, British and Swedish, seem to be heading more in that direction, as is Europeana.
> I agree that we need ways for people to create data and manipulate data so that we can all experiment with these concepts. It needs to become more "real" in order for folks to grasp it. We also need more education in this area, and there is a group at Univ. of Washington who are requesting grants to develop training materials that can be used widely, including databases that can be searched and software that can be used by developers.
> On 1/15/13 5:42 AM, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
>> Am 15.01.2013 13:36, schrieb Todd Carpenter:
>>> ... The end result of
>>> this work will be a report that will identify exchange points where
>>> standards development is needed, and document suggested areas where
>>> functionality testing should be performed. It should help pinpoint
>>> at a high level the development priorities and coordination points
>>> needed over the next 24-36 months.
>> Very briefly:
>> Most helpful might be the development of a prototype for metadata
>> entry and editing. For right now, those who will actually have to do
>> the jobs (formerly called "catalogers", and who cannot in a short or
>> medium term all be replaced by latter-day staff having been brought up
>> on all the new technologies) are most of them thoroughly perplexed
>> and in the dark about what they will be expected to learn and do.
>> In my minority (?) view, the brave new world will have a chance
>> only if there will be a demonstrably more efficient and elegant
>> way of entering and editing data, surpassing the familiar MARC
>> data entry screen and carrying the potential of becoming as
>> widespread and universal as the latter because knowledge transfer
>> from one application to any other is one of the biggest benefits from MARC's omnipresence.
>> At the same time, only an easily learnable and swiftly operable
>> data interface will be able to convince "other communities" to
>> jump the BIBFRAME bandwagon.
>> (Is there any formal involvement with Zepheira?)
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet