>http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
This citation posits three rules:
The first rule, to identify things with URIs ...
The second rule, to use HTTP URIs ...
The third rule, that one should serve information on the web against a
URI ...
So if rather than an ASN for a local authority,
Karen Coyle said:
>No, Mac, that is not what it means.
In the world of RDA and "linked databases", perhaps I should just
accept the fact that English words are not used with their normal
dictionary meaning, and new esoteric terminology is created. beginning
with work/expression/manifestation. I
>An modest proposal: perhaps a file of 3x5 cards produced by a manual
>typewriter will provide the desired reliability?
We still have one client who still insists upon it, but the card sets
are produced by MARC based automated printing.
A few computer crashes have convinced us of the wisdom of ba
This might be of interest--
http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/confevents/upcoming/webinar/cat/031611.cfm
Steven Arakawa
Catalog Librarian for Training & Documentation
Catalog & Metadata Services, SML, Yale University
P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240
(203)432-8286 steven.arak...@ya
An modest proposal: perhaps a file of 3x5 cards produced by a manual typewriter
will provide the desired reliability?
On a less satirical note, to harness the benefits of technology, one must make
certain compromises with respect to one's independence from it. But with the
continued improve
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
> Am 13.01.2011 22:27, schrieb Kevin M. Randall:
> >
> > This is an example of basic relational database normalization, wherein
data
> > redundancy is reduced by using a key (e.g., the authority record control
> > number) in place of the complete data (e.g., the authorize
No, Mac, that is not what it means. I do suggest that you read the
documentation before drawing further conclusions. This is not a
concept that one is likely to learn through an email discussion, and
especially not one where some mis-information may be expressed.
As Kevin Randall suggested,
>
> So based on the URL definitions Kevin supplied, these UTLAS/Pica
> databases are "relational" if linkages are inhouse, but "linked" if to
> outside data, e.g., to the NAF as opposed to authorities in my system?
> Or must the internal or external data meet some additional standard?
>
No addition
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
So based on the URL definitions Kevin supplied, these UTLAS/Pica
databases are "relational" if linkages are inhouse, but "linked" if to
outside data, e.g., to the NAF as opposed to authorities in my system?
Or must the internal or external data meet some additional standard?
Am 14.01.2011 16:13, schrieb Jonathan Rochkind:
And, unfortunately, it's actually the schema, NOT the transmission
format, that is a problem with MARC. It is, as everyone keeps
saying, easy enough to change the serialized transmission format to
something else (MarcXML, an tab delimited spreadsh
Bernard said:
>The Pica system, widely in use in Europe, makes extensive use of data
>linking. Not just for names and subjects but there's also linking
>between bib entities ...
So based on the URL definitions Kevin supplied, these UTLAS/Pica
databases are "relational" if linkages are inhouse, bu
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Many ILS use the MARC _schema_ (aka "vocabulary", aka "list of fields and
subfields") as their internal data model, if not the serialized transmission
format. The MARC 'schema' is kind of implicit, defined as a byproduct of the
transmission format, which is in part wha
Many ILS use the MARC _schema_ (aka "vocabulary", aka "list of fields and
subfields") as their internal data model, if not the serialized transmission
format. The MARC 'schema' is kind of implicit, defined as a byproduct of the
transmission format, which is in part what makes it so cumbersome t
On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Weinheimer Jim wrote:
>
> Internally, each database can be different, as each one is today. As I said
> ISO2709 no longer is used for internal purposes (except for some CDS-ISIS
> catalogs), and is used only for record transfer.
>
And even that is not a necessity
We do need to create a short "what is library linked data" document.
Meanwhile, I discuss linked data in this webinar, which is open access:
http://www.alatechsource.org/blog/2010/04/archive-directions-in-metadata-webinar.html
although not as succinctly as you may wish. I will try to develo
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
Really, I'm not a great fan of MARC, but we do it injustice if we insist
it go away because of ISO2709. The latter has to go, and can go, and
isn't being used nor required nor standing in the way in many
applications right now, with no harm done to MARC whatsoever.
No,
Kevin Randall said
> I think of linked data as something that *functionally* would be something
> akin to a relational database on steroids, but in its architecture is not
> really a relational database. I don't think I would be very good at
> explaining it, but you can look up linked data in Wi
Am 14.01.2011 13:19, schrieb Weinheimer Jim:
I hate to keep harping on this, but I think it is a crucial point
since I believe that ISO2709 is one of the key problems holding us
back; certainly more important than adopting FRBR or RDA. As I said
before, ISO2709 may be able to be revamped to hand
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
Am 14.01.2011 12:24, schrieb Weinheimer Jim:
>
> Bernhard, Sorry to press the point but I think it is a vital one:
> using MARC in its ISO2709 form *cannot* work with linked data.
For all I know, I have to disagree. It is all a matter of field content
and then what the s
Am 14.01.2011 12:24, schrieb Weinheimer Jim:
Bernhard, Sorry to press the point but I think it is a vital one:
using MARC in its ISO2709 form *cannot* work with linked data.
For all I know, I have to disagree. It is all a matter of field content
and then what the software does with that - no m
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
That may be true for some ILS systems but certainly not for all of them.
If it is, then it is a weakness of that system, not a feature of MARC.
Get rid of those systems or get vendors to understand that this mode
of communication is - though it needs not be thrown overboa
Am 14.01.2011 10:47, schrieb Weinheimer Jim:
... but when I then want to transfer that record that I worked with
into my catalog, I have to recompile it back into an IS2709 record so
that I import using Z39.50, when we are stuck with each and every one
of the limitations of ISO2709.
That may b
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
Am 14.01.2011 09:54, schrieb Weinheimer Jim:
>
> When we talk about MARC as it is used by libraries today, we cannot
> separate it from the underlying ISO2709 format,...
Oh but we can, we certainly can and we should and we do. A MARC record
can easily be rendered like th
Am 13.01.2011 22:27, schrieb Kevin M. Randall:
This is an example of basic relational database normalization, wherein data
redundancy is reduced by using a key (e.g., the authority record control
number) in place of the complete data (e.g., the authorized heading
contained in the authority recor
Am 14.01.2011 09:54, schrieb Weinheimer Jim:
When we talk about MARC as it is used by libraries today, we cannot
separate it from the underlying ISO2709 format,...
Oh but we can, we certainly can and we should and we do. A MARC record
can easily be rendered like this:
LDR 00851cam a2200253Ii
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
I don't see any significant increase in flexibility to share Marc
records by 'switching' to MarcXML. Am I missing something? What
exactly would be the advantages of 'switching' to MarcXML?
When we talk about MARC as it is used by libraries today, we cannot separate i
26 matches
Mail list logo
