Karen,

There are tools out there, like the OpenRefine[1], and specifically the
Reconciliation Service API's [2] which can be built to interact with it,
which are meant to help solve this problem. For instance, the there is a
third-party VIAF Reconciliation service [3] built on top of the VIAF API
which will take a plain text name of a person and try to find a VIAF URI
for it. There are a lot of ways that Reconciliation Service could be
improved,and creating an in-house version that really leverages the data in
VIAF to work with OpenRefine's methods could be a fantastic example of how
a data provider like OCLC can meet owners of legacy data more than
half-way. Just making the data (and and API) available was already half-way
because it allowed the community to innovate with it. If they can take the
next step, FANTASTIC, but if they don't I'm not holding it against them.

Best,
Chad

1 - http://openrefine.org/
2 - https://github.com/OpenRefine/OpenRefine/wiki/Reconciliation-Service-API
3-
http://iphylo.blogspot.com/2013/04/reconciling-author-names-using-open.html


On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 8:53 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
>