Print

Print


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.