On 06/02/2017 16:32, Jeff Edmunds wrote:
> Your final paragraph is what intrigues me most. How, in fact, would
> widespread adoption by libraries of BIBFRAME (or whatever it evolves
> into) affect user experience? Would they find more resources? Would they
> find them more quickly? Would resources discovered be better
> contextualized, such that information literacy would be in some sense
> built into search results? I doubt it.
Again, when someone makes their data available in RDF and linked data,
that doesn't mean that the *owners* of that data will be able to do
something they couldn't already have done with their own data. Sure,
some things may get easier and others may get harder, but when you are
dealing with your own data, you can already do whatever you want to with
it. The purpose of RDF/Linked data is to allow *others* to use your data
in better, easier, and more standardized ways than putting your data up
in Excel files or something similar. If a library wants to use linked
data from some other sites in their catalog, e.g. from
Wikipedia/Wikidata, they can do it right now without having to turn
their own data into RDF.
So, putting our data in Bibframe/RDF will allow *non-library agencies*
to create tools such as an "Uber" but they will be able to include
Bibframe library data, e.g. something that brings together Bibframe
data, Wikidata, and the Google Art Project might be useful--if it
doesn't exist already. Still, just because you put your data into RDF
and make it openly available, doesn't guarantee that anyone will use
your data, and a glance at the Linked Open Data cloud
(http://lod-cloud.net/) will show lots of linked data sites that perhaps
no one has ever used.
One app I have considered making would bring together images and
information for visitors to some of the museums in Rome. For instance,
there is a fabulous museum of musical instruments and when I visited it,
I kept thinking it would be great to be able to hear how those
instruments sound. Additional information about the instruments would be
OK too. There would be a lot of ways to make it, but one way of creating
a tool such as this would be to include, e.g. the LOD information from
Wikipedia/Wikidata. Would I use Bibframe information if it were
available? Maybe. I don't know if letting someone in a museum know what
is available from a library would be all that useful for them or
not--but I must say that if there is no option to use library data, it
certainly cannot be used.
Additionally, RDF/Linked data is not the only way to use information
from other sites. The fabulously popular Google Maps uses a different
technology (API) which is simpler for everyone to implement and there
are tons of all kinds of APIs
(https://www.programmableweb.com/apis/directory). Worldcat has APIs but
I'm not sure they are open or not.
That said, we should make library data available in formats other than
Z39.50 and it should have been done at leasts 20 years ago. I am for the
Bibframe project, but we shouldn't expect libraries to do anything new
with their own data than what they have been doing all along.
--
James Weinheimer [log in to unmask]
First Thus http://blog.jweinheimer.net
First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus
Personal Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/james.weinheimer.35
Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JamesWeinheimer
Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/cataloging-matters-podcasts
The Library Herald http://libnews.jweinheimer.net/
|
