Catalog vocabularies and their ontologies on the web are the future fur cultural heritage information indexing and storing, as ISO 2709 was a key standard 40 years ago.

Since the W3C blog entry announces a strong drive towards a class of first-citizen vocabularies and indicates that LOV's are unreliable and rather ridiculous, I would welcome activities that can design candidates for a consistent and rich family of "Cultural Heritage Vocabularies", which are not dominated and streamlined by for-profit web industry, but created by library professionals and global non-profit organizations, like IFLA, UNESCO, Wikimedia, OKFN, and many more. 

RDA / Bibframe vocabularies, beside others like CIDOC-CRM, can hopefully be a valuable input in that context.

It should be noted that buzzwords like "big data" created an overwhelming demand of "encoding and publicizing data" in the IT industry, which in fact is nothing new but at it's core a traditional librarian's job. We will either see the art of cataloging entering the web, or the reinvention of the wheel in form of "data catalogs", without the expressiveness of librarians' knowledge and expertise, which may be doomed to fail.

Just my 2 cent.


On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Rurik Greenall <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear All,

How will/should W3C's recent data-activity blog post on vocabularies affect BIBFRAME?

I include links to the blog post and my reaction to this.


Rurik Thomas Greenall
NTNU University Library | NTNU Universitetsbiblioteket