 |
 |
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 > > >