> "it would be great if they were interested in the idea"
I can't find the original source, but I remember reading - many years
ago - an interview with one of the Google founders (probably Sergey
Brin), where he plainly stated that Google weren't interested in
'metadata'; he basically said Google would only use content that was
designed for humans, not content (data) that was designed for machines
(i.e. metadata). Not sure if the company's strategy has moved on since
then.
Following on from Mike's original idea, maybe it would be interested to
take this one step on, and use Google Base, populated using the APIs
(http://code.google.com/apis/base/), to store specific structures about
museum objects (i.e. we could define specific fields, like date,
creator, all the usual dc stuff). It might even be relatively
straightforward to create an OAI interface that fed into the Google Base
API, maybe? i.e. anyone who had an OAI compatible object repository
could then feed straight into Google Base.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Ottevanger, Jeremy
> Sent: 18 December 2006 12:35
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: SPAM:Re: [MCG] Google Coop / Museum collections
>
> Very interesting, thanks for that pointer. It reads as though they're
> just interested in the identifier, though. Doing anything useful with
> collections data in museum webpages would involve rather more,
although
> it would be great if they were interested in the idea. From what
people
> were saying at the last Semantic Web Thinktank meeting, there are
> clearly considerable reservations about what DC can usefully achieve
in
> full SW terms, but all the same the stuff is out there and it's surely
> better than nothing, despite its limitations.
>
> Jeremy
>
**************************************************
For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
**************************************************
|