Richard covered the options pretty well from our perspective. That is, if
you have an OCLC number in hand you are in really good shape, and can use
software to make appropriate linkages. If you don't have an OCLC number,
then it is (as I have experienced myself) pretty much a world of hurt.

You *might* be able to use xISBN to find one an OCLC number to try, but of
course that's only good for a part of the collections of many libraries. If
you are doing a title/author search, then lord help you. I don't know how
you could make appropriate decisions on which item to use from a software
perspective. Take the first hit? You could see how that works.

In the end there may need to be reconciliation services just like we had
similar services in the card-catalog-to-digital years.
Roy


On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 5:53 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Roy, the question that I have is, as I say below, about DISCOVERABILITY of
> URIs, not intellectual property issues. It's great that there are lots of
> URIs for useful things out in the world, but they don't jump into your data
> store on their own through some kind of magic. To me, the big problem today
> is that of populating legacy data with useful identifiers. I know that some
> folks have worked at making connections between subject headings in their
> catalog and the URIs available through id.loc.gov - and as I recall, it
> turns out to be fairly frustrating. It seems to be that the solution to
> this is that providers of URIs and users of URIs have to both make an
> effort to meet half-way, or at a mutally convenient location. It simply is
> not enough to say: "Hey, look! I've got all of these URIs. Good luck!" So
> let's talk about how we make that connection.
>
> kc
>
> On 4/30/14, 1:17 PM, Roy Tennant wrote:
>
>> Also, this:
>>
>> "OCLC identifiers, and Linked Data URIs, are always in the public domain.
>> Independent of the data and/or information content (which may be subject
>> to
>> individual licensing terms open or otherwise) that they identify, or link
>> to, OCLC identifiers (e.g. OCLC Numbers, VIAF IDs, or WorldCat Work URIs)
>> can be treated as if they are in the public domain and can be included in
>> any data exposure mechanism or activity as public domain data."
>>
>> http://www.oclc.org/developer/develop/linked-data.en.html
>>
>> Roy
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Richard Wallis <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>  To unpack the several questions lurking in Karen’s question.
>>>
>>> As to being able to use the WorldCat Works data/identifiers there is no
>>> difference between a or b - it is ODC-BY licensed data.
>>>
>>> Getting a Work URI may be easier for a) as they should be able to
>>> identify
>>> the OCLC Number and hence use the linked data from it’s URI <
>>> http://worldcat.org/oclc/{ocn}> to pick up the link to it’s work.
>>>
>>> Tools such as xISBN <http://xisbn.worldcat.org/xisbnadmin/doc/api.htm>
>>> can
>>> step you towards identifier lookups and are openly available for low
>>> volume
>>> usage.
>>>
>>> Citation lookup is more a bib lookup feature, that you could get an OCLC
>>> Number from. One of colleagues may be helpful on the particulars of this.
>>>
>>> Apologies for being WorldCat specific, but Karen did ask.
>>>
>>> ~Richard.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30 April 2014 17:15, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  My question has to do with discoverability. Let's say that I have a
>>>> bibliographic database and I want to add the OCLC work identifiers to
>>>> it.
>>>> Obviously I don't want to do it by hand. I might have ISBNs, but in some
>>>> cases I will have a regular author/title-type citation.
>>>>
>>>> and let's say that I am asking this for two different institutions:
>>>> a) is an OCLC member institution
>>>> b) is not
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> kc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/30/14, 8:47 AM, Dan Scott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Roy Tennant <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  This has now instead become a reasonable recommendation
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> concerning ODC-BY licensing [3] but the confusion and uncertainty
>>>>>>> about which records an OCLC member may redistribute remains.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [3] http://www.oclc.org/news/releases/2012/201248.en.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Allow me to try to put this confusion and uncertainty to rest once
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> all:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ALL THE THINGS. ALL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At least as far as we are concerned. I think it's well past time to
>>>>>> put
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> past in the past.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  That's great, Roy. That's a *lot* simpler than parsing the
>>>>> recommendations, WCRR, community norms, and such at [A, B] :)
>>>>>
>>>>>   Meanwhile, we have just put nearly 200 million works records up as
>>>>>
>>>> linked
>>>
>>>> open data. [1], [2], [3]. If that doesn't rock the library open linked
>>>>>> data
>>>>>> world, then no one is paying attention.
>>>>>> Roy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://oclc.org/en-US/news/releases/2014/201414dublin.html
>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>> http://dataliberate.com/2014/04/worldcat-works-197-million-
>>>>>> nuggets-of-linked-data/
>>>>>> [3] http://hangingtogether.org/?p=3811
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Yes, that is really awesome. But Laura was asking about barriers to
>>>>> open metadata, so damn you for going off-topic with PR around a lack
>>>>> of barriers to some metadata (which, for those who have not looked
>>>>> yet, have a nice ODC-BY licensing statement at the bottom of a given
>>>>> Works page) :)
>>>>>
>>>>> A. http://oclc.org/worldcat/community/record-use.en.html
>>>>> B. http://oclc.org/worldcat/community/record-use/data-
>>>>> licensing/questions.en.html
>>>>>
>>>>>  --
>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Richard Wallis
>>> Founder, Data Liberate
>>> http://dataliberate.com
>>> Tel: +44 (0)7767 886 005
>>>
>>> Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
>>> Skype: richard.wallis1
>>> Twitter: @rjw
>>>
>>>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
>