Quoting Enrico Silterra <[log in to unmask]>:
> my thought on OPDSv would be that perhaps libraries should offer their
> catalogs of ebooks as opds catalogs -- and 'purchase' in the opds
> sense would be
> perhaps 'checking out' the ebook? or adding the ebook to one's own
> ebook library as a URL -- not as a download?
>
> how do folks see this working in the library context? if at all?
The Internet Archive and Open Library have done an implementation of OPDS:
http://ianews.wordpress.com/2011/03/03/open-library-opds/
I'm afraid I don't know more than that, e.g. how it is being used and
who is making use of it.
My main question is why we need a specific format for this, but I
think it is needed because there are particular sharing goals that
would involve ebook publishers, and it had to work in Atom. Personally
I think that we have plenty of bib metadata already, and it's pretty
well understood. Perhaps I am wrong about that. It does make me
nervous when I see formats that are designed only for books, with
elements like "author". Someone is going to want to use this for some
other format, for sure, and we'll end up with painters and composers
and inventors all coded as "author." It doesn't make sense to me to
create book-centric/exclusive metadata, but in this case that reflects
the industry that is directly involved, book publishing.
Which brings me to .... I've been involved in various groups that have
members who are championing a particular set of information resources
that they care deeply about -- often segments of academic publishing.
They create metadata schemas that work great for their area of
interest but they often think that it's just a matter of extending
that metadata to cover other interests. I don't think it works that
way, or at least that's not the best way to do things. I look at
BIBO,[1] which has no elements for sound or movie materials, and that
lists "map" as a form of illustration. This latter obviously would not
reflect the view of geography professionals who consider maps the meat
of their work not a mere illustration. The particular value that I see
in library metadata is the lack of self-interest and the attempt
(achieved or not) of treating all resources equally. The 'big picture'
view of library metadata is not understood, and I've heard folks
complain that library metadata doesn't reflect their viewpoint. I
haven't yet figured out how to explain this to them. Ed Summers
mentioned a call for a manifesto for linked data in his blog,[2] I'd
like a manifesto for library cataloging -- something very short that
explains the basic philosophy, and that doesn't use the term 'books'
anywhere.
kc
[1] http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/
[2]
http://inkdroid.org/journal/2011/07/14/stanford-linked-data-meeting-notes-an-incidental-manifesto/
>
> thanks for your ideas!
>
> rick
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Jul 30, 2011, at 10:05 AM, Eric Lease Morgan wrote:
>>
>>>> http://opds-spec.org/2011/06/15/opds-1-1-call-for-comments/
>>>
>>> By way of the Code4Lib mailing list and Ed
>>
>> Sh!t Don't you hate when that happens.
>>
>> --
>> Earache Least Moron
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Enrico Silterra Software Engineer
> 501 Olin Library Cornell University Ithaca NY 14853
> Voice: 607-255-6851 Fax: 607-255-6110 E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> http://www.library.cornell.edu/dlit
> "Out of the crooked timber of humanity no straight thing was ever made"
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE
> The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only
> for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
> dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance
> upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended
> recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact
> the sender and destroy any copies of this document.
>
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
|
