On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> “There is more than one way to skin a cat.” There are advantages and
> disadvantages to every software solution.
I think what Mark and I are trying to say is that the first step to this
"solution" is not by applying software at existing data, but by trying to
figure out the problem you're actually trying to solve. Any "linked data
future" cannot be a simple as a technologist giving some magic tool to
archivists and librarians.
You still haven't really answered my question about what you're hoping to
achieve and who stands to benefit from it. I don't see how assigning a
bunch of arbitrary identifiers, properties, and values to a description of
a collection of archival materials (especially since you're talking about
doing this in XSLT, so your archival collections can't even really be
related to /each other/ much less anything else).
Who is going to use going to use this data? What are they supposed to do
with it? What will libraries and archives get from it?
I am certainly not above academic exercises (or without my own), but I
absolutely can see *no* beneficial "archival linked data" created simply by
pointing an XSLT at a bunch of EAD and MARCXML and I certainly can't
without a clear vision of the model that said XSLT is supposed to generate.
The key part here is the data model, and taking a 'software
solution'-first approach does nothing to address that.