Katherine M: Weekly Response #5

A recurring topic in our readings has been the difficulty of maintaining catalogue vocabularies to enable translations between institutions. The Baker article seemed hopeful about the future of library standards we are currently building through linked communities, citing the example of Europeana. Additionally, the usefulness of RDF which by providing “description set profiles, the quality and consistency of data traditionally required for sharing records among libraries can be ensured by defining constraints as constraints on the contents of data – without compromising the interoperability of the underlying vocabularies in the wider linked data environment.” The FRBR piece was a nice complement because it really exemplified how complicated the semantics of defining bibliographic objects can get.  I found the separate groups which broke down categories of entities to be pretty clearly defined but on the same hand, I understood how they could be interpreted differently through different eyes. The promise of using linked data to view how other communities are classifying objects seems to be an exciting way to move forward.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s