On Dec 5, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Kevin Ford <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>> Frankly, I don't see how you can generate RDF that anybody would want to
>> use from XSLT: where would your URIs come from?  What, exactly, are you
>> modeling?
> 
> -- Our experience getting to good, URI rich RDF has been basically a 
> two-step process.  First there is the "raw" conversion, which certainly 
> results in verbose blank-node-rich RDF, but we follow that pass with a 
> second one during which blank nodes are replaced with URIs.


The posting above is exactly the approach I am advocating. As long as the linked data is not incorrect but merely not best practice, then implement linked data with what one has in hand. This will accomplish two goals: 1) make cultural heritage institution metadata more widely available, and 2) provide practice for the technologist for implementation. Once the data is available, then enhance it and repeat the process. It is a never-ending thing. —Eric Morgan