yo, i get it


On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I don't know what your definition of "serialization" is, but I don't know
> of any where "data model" and "formatted output of a data model" are
> synonymous.
>
> RDF is a data model *not* a serialization.
>
> -Ross.
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Ethan Gruber <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I see that serialization has a different definition in computer science
> > than I thought it did.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > That's still not a "serialization".  It's just a similar data model.
> > >  Pretty huge difference.
> > >
> > > -Ross.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Ethan Gruber <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm not sure that I agree that RDF is not a serialization.  It really
> > > > depends on the context of the system and intended use of the linked
> > data.
> > > > For example, TEI is designed with a specific purpose which cannot be
> > > > replicated in RDF (at least, not very easily at all), but deriving
> RDF
> > > from
> > > > highly-linked TEI to put into an endpoint can open doors to queries
> > which
> > > > are otherwise impossible to make on the data.  This certainly
> requires
> > > some
> > > > rethinking of the way texts interact.  But perhaps it may be best to
> > say
> > > > that RDF *can* (but not necessarily) be a derivation, rather than
> > > > serialization, of some larger, more complex canonical data model.
> > > >
> > > > Ethan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Aaron Rubinstein <
> > > > [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think you’ve hit the nail on the head here, Karen. I would just
> > add,
> > > or
> > > > > maybe reassure, that this does not necessarily require rethinking
> > your
> > > > > existing metadata but how to translate that existing metadata into
> a
> > > > linked
> > > > > data environment. Though this might seem like a pain, in many cases
> > it
> > > > will
> > > > > actually inspire you to go back and improve/increase the value of
> > that
> > > > > existing metadata.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is definitely looking awesome, Eric!
> > > > >
> > > > > Aaron
> > > > >
> > > > > On Nov 19, 2013, at 9:41 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Eric, I think this skips a step - which is the design step in
> which
> > > you
> > > > > create a domain model that uses linked data as its basis. RDF is
> not
> > a
> > > > > serialization; it actually may require you to re-think the basic
> > > > structure
> > > > > of your metadata. The reason for that is that it provides
> > capabilities
> > > > that
> > > > > record-based data models do not. Rather than starting with current
> > > > > metadata, you need to take a step back and ask: what does my
> > > information
> > > > > world look like as linked data?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I repeat: RDF is NOT A SERIALIZATION.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > kc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/19/13 5:04 AM, Eric Lease Morgan wrote:
> > > > > >> I believe participating in the Semantic Web and providing
> content
> > > via
> > > > > the principles of linked data is not "rocket surgery", especially
> for
> > > > > cultural heritage institutions -- libraries, archives, and museums.
> > > Here
> > > > is
> > > > > a simple recipe for their participation:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   1. use existing metadata standards (MARC, EAD, etc.) to
> describe
> > > > > >>      collections
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   2. use any number of existing tools to convert the metadata to
> > > > > >>      HTML, and save the HTML on a Web server
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   3. use any number of existing tools to convert the metadata to
> > > > > >>      RDF/XML (or some other "serialization" of RDF), and save
> the
> > > > > >>      RDF/XML on a Web server
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   4. rest, congratulate yourself, and share your experience with
> > > > > >>      others in your domain
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   5. after the first time though, go back to Step #1, but this
> > time
> > > > > >>      work with other people inside your domain making sure you
> use
> > > as
> > > > > >>      many of the same URIs as possible
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   6. after the second time through, go back to Step #1, but this
> > > > > >>      time supplement access to your linked data with a triple
> > store,
> > > > > >>      thus supporting search
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   7. after the third time through, go back to Step #1, but this
> > > > > >>      time use any number of existing tools to expose the content
> > in
> > > > > >>      your other information systems (relational databases,
> OAI-PMH
> > > > > >>      data repositories, etc.)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>   8. for dessert, cogitate ways to exploit the linked data in
> your
> > > > > >>      domain to discover new and additional relationships between
> > > URIs,
> > > > > >>      and thus make the Semantic Web more of a reality
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> What do you think?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I am in the process of writing a guidebook on the topic of
> linked
> > > data
> > > > > and archives. In the guidebook I will elaborate on this recipe and
> > > > provide
> > > > > instructions for its implementation. [1]
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> [1] guidebook - http://sites.tufts.edu/liam/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Eric Lease Morgan
> > > > > >> University of Notre Dame
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Karen Coyle
> > > > > > [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> > > > > > m: 1-510-435-8234
> > > > > > skype: kcoylenet
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>