Ed:
It was my understanding that what you were doing with lcsh.info was
experimental, and not intended to be the official source of LCSH URIs.
If I'm wrong about that, please correct me. I didn't intend to
disparage what you've done--I think it's terrific and I've always been a
big proponent of the "just do it" strategy myself.
Ed Summers wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Diane I. Hillmann <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Further down in the specific analyses of the terms chosen for the sample AP,
>> we see that the lcsh.info work seems to be recommended--and I have some
>> concerns with that. This work is specifically not the official source of
>> LCSH, and much as I have the utmost respect for it and use it in
>> presentations as an example of what can (and hopefully will) be done, we
>> need to be really clear that this is NOT the official prime time source of
>> URIs for LCSH.
>>
>
> Just so I understand are you concerned that the domain for the URIs
> isn't loc.gov? Or do you have other concerns as well?
>
>
I don't really care about the domain, it's whether the URIs will persist
and the data be maintained properly. Otherwise, we have no business
telling people to use those URIs in their data.
>> Not being "real" about this risks losing credibility with
>> the library community, which has a big stake in this work being done
>> officially and with care (and appropriate maintenance). If you want to use
>> a vocabulary that does have official URIs, I'd suggest one of the GEM
>> vocabularies available on the NSDL Registry (which actually might be more
>> appropriate for the application!). Or use LCSH as literals for now (or
>> both).
>>
>
> Hmph, that sounds a bit self-serving but I'm no stranger to that :-)
>
The GEM vocabularies were registered by the GEM Consortium--they were
among the first projects to build stable URIs for their terms and have
been maintaining those URIs for several years well before they began to
use the NSDL Registry. If you know of another general set of topics to
suggest, please do--I know these and have used them before, so made the
suggestion with that understanding.
Diane
|