On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Ed, thanks. I'll need you to be a bit more -v on this one: are you asking
> for a an RDF option on the API, or that Works as a whole be represented as
> linked data? The Open Library doesn't present itself as linked data, as you
> know, and although that would be very interesting I don't think that's on
> their production schedule for the near future.
Well you do have a nice start at some Linked Data views already in
Open Library, e.g.
I guess what I was suggesting is that you link these Expressions up
with their respective Works where you know the relations, perhaps
using Ian Davis' FRBR vocabulary? I don't think this precludes a handy
web2.0 API like what OCLC and LibraryThing offer already ... but
there's an opportunity to make the Linked Data views you have already
quite a bit richer I think.
That being said, I'm probably in a minority view here thinking that
the Linked Data pattern has something to offer. Queue the Tim Spalding
rendition of Don't Believe the Semantic Web Hype :-)