I would argue that it all depends on what you veiw your community as.  If
you your community consists of fellow catalogers, then you could argue that
Linked Data provides you no benefit and no improvement over tried and true
standards.  Although others could say that the 're-usability' of linked
data would be of value to catalogers in streamlining their workflows.  I
can see why their is resistance to a new cataloging standard from technical
services.  The control of the information by catalogers is a source of
pride for them.  Accuracy in the information is a current tenet of the
profession.  And Linked Data brings an unknown element regarding the
control and accuracy of that information.

On the flip side, if you view your community as the community at large -
other librarians, researches and patrons, the value of Linked Data takes a
different focus.  As a user I'm not concerned with correct punctuation in
marc tags or even the right data in the right tags generally speaking.  ILS
system usually narrowly focuses on author,title,subject when providing
search results.  Tags with publication information and series would also be
of value in some searches.  Many of the other tags are locked into 5XX tags
and generally only searchable via keyword search.  As a user I would love
to have that information more readily accessible and linked to other
records - this is something that would benefit researches mainly and may or
may not have much practical application to public libraries.

A public library community at large would benefit from seeing the libraries
holdings displayed on the web.  If I'm looking for a book, I want to see my
library's results on the first page, not buried on subsequent pages of
google if it displays at all.  It seems this aspect of linked data would
directly impact public libraries struggling to show their value in some
communities.  If the resources are hidden, they are potentially
underutilized and possibly underfunded as a result.  It may be possible
that an implementation of linked data to showcase library resources could
be adopted by libraries as a first step into linked data that doesn't
require a rethinking of their current marc processes.  When (and if)
translation tools are available, the marc could be transformed into basic
triples, made available to web crawlers and direct traffic to your library.

Joy Nelson
ByWater Solutions

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Michael Ayres <[log in to unmask]>

> But of what value is this so-called ‘Linked Data community’ for MY
> community?  Does direct connection of my local bibliographic records to the
> internet really (REALLY) equate with better information retrieval for my
> community?  Why should I follow errant standards that do not bestow any
> perceivable benefit over my current tried-and-true standards—especially
> when there is a very high, unaffordable cost involved?  These are some of
> the questions that direct the resistance of so many of us to buying into
> the ‘snake oil’ of RDA and BIBFRAME.
> (Really not trying to stir up this battle once again.)
> Just two cents more—other side of the coin,
> *Michael Ayres | Technical Services Manager*
> City of Irving  l  Irving Public Library System
> 801 W. Irving Blvd., Irving, TX  75060
> P:  (972) 721-2764   F:  (972) 721-2329
> [log in to unmask] | <>
> *From:* Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *FunnyFace Internet
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 02, 2017 7:06 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [BIBFRAME] Failure
> The whole point of RDA and BIBFRAME is moving to Linked Data community for
> better information retrieval and connectivity on the Internet. During the
> transitional period, some libraries follow MARC, and some follow BIBFRAME.
> But eventually we all should follow the same standards - RDA and BIBFRAME.
> If each library follows different standards as a long term plan, do we lose
> the original purpose of RDA and BIBFRAME?
> BIBFRAME is a very complex thing to develop. It is not just  a piece of
> software, but vocabularies and classes. Cataloging librarians are very
> meticulous (the most meticulous type of librarians) and hard to please.
> BiBFRAME has to become perfect through use and continuous effort. It will
> never work in a vacuum like now. Someone has to start using it. There is no
> way turning back at this point.
> Just two cents.
> Sharon/Rider University

Joy Nelson
Director of Migrations

ByWater Solutions <>
Support and Consulting for Open Source Software
Office: Fort Worth, TX
Phone/Fax (888)900-8944
What is Koha? <>