On 23/08/2012 22:55, Karen Coyle wrote: <snip> > > On 8/23/12 10:43 AM, James Weinheimer wrote: >> Still the basic idea still is worth a try (I think), where embedded >> metadata would be linked to separate metadata records in catalogs and >> spiders would keep the two in sync. > I believe the technology is called "microformats,"[1] with the primary > one today being schema.org. This is also the basis for the linked data > that is now included in each Worldcat page. </snip>
Yes. Back in 1998-9, I don't believe microformats existed yet. In my examples, I used information in the meta fields in the header, but it all comes down to the same thing. My idea was based on setting up a workflow in tandem with webmasters. It starts with library (or other expert) selectors who would select sites and get into initial touch with the webmaster of the sites they selected, telling them that their sites were selected as especially valuable and what was expected of them. Catalogers would then make the initial description along with headings; then the entire record(s) would be sent to the webmaster, who would add the record to the headers of the required pages of their sites. The workflow followed CIP up to this point. After this, it was they up to the webmasters to update the descriptive information (about 1000 times more efficient than library catalogers), while all headings would be updated by catalogers. Webmasters could add their own keywords (limited to a certain number, controlled for spam, etc.) plus other information. Spiders would keep everything in sync. Certainly microformats would be great for something like this. -- *James Weinheimer* weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com *First Thus* http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ *Cooperative Cataloging Rules* http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ *Cataloging Matters Podcasts* http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
