 |
 |
OK, back to Tim's specific question. I'm not sure why you want to put bib data in a tweet at all for your application. Why not just use a shortened URL pointing at your page of metadata? That page could offer metadata via BIBO, Open Graph and FOAF in RDFa, COinS, RIS, etc. using established methods to serve multiple applications at once. When Twitter annotations come along, the URL can be put in the annotation field. Eric On Apr 21, 2010, at 6:08 AM, Tim Spalding wrote: > Have C4Lers looked at the new Twitter annotations feature? > > http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2010/04/19/twitter-introduces-annotations-hash-tags-become-obsolete/ > > I'd love to get some people together to agree on a standard book > annotation format, so two people can tweet about the same book or > other library item, and they or someone else can pull that together. > > I'm inclined to start adding it to the "I'm talking about" and "I'm > adding" links on LibraryThing. I imagine it could be easily added to > many library applications too—anywhere there is or could be a "share > this on Twitter" link, including OPACs, citation managers, library > event feeds, etc. > > Also, wouldn't it be great to show the world another interesting, > useful and cool use of library data that OCLC's rules would prohibit? > > So the question is the format. Only a maniac would suggest MARC. For > size and other reasons, even MODS is too much. But perhaps we can > borrow the barest of field names from MODS, COinS, or from the most > commonly used bibliographic format, Amazon XML. > > Thoughts? > > Tim > > -- > Check out my library at http://www.librarything.com/profile/timspalding Eric Hellman President, Gluejar, Inc. 41 Watchung Plaza, #132 Montclair, NJ 07042 USA [log in to unmask] http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/