The use case clarifies perfectly.

Totally feasible.  Well, I should say "totally feasible" with the caveat 
that I've never used the Worldcat Search API.  Not letting that stop me, 
so long as it is what I imagine it is, then a developer should be able 
to perform a search, retrieve the response, and, by integrating one of 
the tools advertised on the schema.org website into his/her code, then 
retrieve the microdata for each resource returned from the search (and 
save it as RDF or whatever).

If someone has created something like this, do speak up.

Yours,

Kevin




On 07/10/2012 04:48 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> Kevin, if you misunderstand then I undoubtedly haven't been clear (let's
> at least share the confusion :-)). Here's the use case:
>
> PersonA wants to create a comprehensive bibliography of works by
> AuthorB. The goal is to do a search on AuthorB in WorldCat and extract
> the RDFa data from those pages in order to populate the bibliography.
>
> Apart from all of the issues of getting a perfect match on authors and
> of manifestation duplicates (there would need to be editing of the
> results after retrieval at the user's end), how feasible is this? Assume
> that the author is prolific enough that one wouldn't want to look up all
> of the records by hand.
>
> kc
>
> On 7/10/12 1:43 PM, Kevin Ford wrote:
>> As for someone who might want to do this programmatically, he/she
>> should take a look at the "Programming languages" section of the
>> second link I sent along:
>>
>> http://schema.rdfs.org/tools.html
>>
>> There one can find Ruby, Python, and Java extractors and parsers
>> capable of outputting RDF.  A developer can take one of these and
>> programmatically get at the data.
>>
>> Apologies if I am misunderstanding your intent.
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07/10/2012 04:34 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>> Thanks, Kevin! And Richard!
>>>
>>> I'm thinking we need a good web site with links to tools. I had already
>>> been introduced to
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa/
>>>
>>> where you can past a URI and get ttl or rdf/xml. These are all good
>>> resources. But what about someone who wants to do this programmatically,
>>> not through a web site? Richard's message indicates that this isn't yet
>>> available, so perhaps we should be gathering use cases to support the
>>> need? And have a place to post various solutions, even ones that are not
>>> OCLC-specific? (Because I am hoping that the use of microformats will
>>> increase in general.)
>>>
>>> kc
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/10/12 12:12 PM, Kevin Ford wrote:
>>>> > is there an open search to get one to the desired records in the
>>>> first
>>>> > place?
>>>> -- I'm not certain this will fully address your question, but try
>>>> these two sites:
>>>>
>>>> Website: http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets
>>>> Example: http://tinyurl.com/dx3h5bg
>>>>
>>>> Website: http://linter.structured-data.org/
>>>> Example: http://tinyurl.com/bmm8bbc
>>>>
>>>> These sites will extract the data, but I don't think you get your
>>>> choice of serialization.  The data are extracted and displayed on the
>>>> resulting page in the HTML, but at least you can *see* the data.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, there are a number of "tools" to help with microdata
>>>> extraction here:
>>>>
>>>> http://schema.rdfs.org/tools.html
>>>>
>>>> Some of these will allow you to output specific (RDF) serializations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> HTH,
>>>>
>>>> Kevin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 07/10/2012 02:42 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>>>>> I have demonstrated the schema.org/RDFa microdata in the WC
>>>>> database to
>>>>> various folks and the question always is: how do I get access to this?
>>>>> (The only source I have is the Facebook API, me being a "user" rather
>>>>> than a "maker".) The microdata is CC-BY once you get a Worldcat
>>>>> URI, but
>>>>> is there an open search to get one to the desired records in the first
>>>>> place? I'm poorly-versed in WC APIs so I'm hoping others have a better
>>>>> grasp.
>>>>>
>>>>> @rjw: the OCLC website does a thorough job of hiding email
>>>>> addresses or
>>>>> I would have asked this directly. Then again, a discussion here could
>>>>> have added value.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> kc
>>>>>
>>>
>