On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 8:20 PM, James Weinheimer <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > On 3/6/2015 10:59 PM, Ross Singer wrote: >> > > I think this shows how the "data" in the library catalog is fundamentally > different from the "data" in other kinds of databases. And it also > illustrates how the normal tools used for "data mining" and "data > extraction" that work fairly well in other venues are more or less doomed to > failure when applied to library catalogs. They contain a different kind of > data. > I find these statements hard to believe. Data is just data. Data, metadata - there is no difference. People are using RDF to describe proteins, semiconductor products, horoscope signs, antique coins and who knows what else. What makes you think libraries are special? Again, I mean real technical limitations -- all the history and the "traditional ways of doing things" are irrelevant here.