On 2 April 2013 15:40, Nick Poole <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> In so doing, again theoretically, the distinction between 'internal'
> applications and 'external' ones becomes arbitrary. If the modelling and
> contextualisation of the data in terms of entities and relations is
> sufficient and if vocabularies are available as services rather than term
> lists, then it ought to be possible to derive your internal usage and your
> external usage from the same body of information.
>
I suppose this is where things fall down slightly for me - I've found it
difficult to reliably and accurately match terms across collections without
some specialist knowledge of the collections and their documentation
history. Publishing collections records from the Science Museum Group
taught me that preparing data (as in catalogue field, not descriptions) for
use externally can take as much thought and care as any other
audience-focussed publication process. There's an awful lot of tacit
knowledge contained in collections records that isn't obvious in
machine-processable documentation, which is I suspect one reason for
under-use of machine-readable GLAM data*.
And out of curiosity, how many museums, libraries, archives etc are already
using CIDOC-CRM for some or all of their collections? Are we anywhere near
a critical mass of content or experience with CRM or is everyone crying off
with a headache? And what internal uses are people making of their own
collections data - who's drinking their own champagne? Drop me a line
off-list if you don't want to reply-all.
On 3 April 2013 13:17, Richard Light <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The criteria should be that the information resources we want to work with
> (a) have a persistent unique identity, (b) are reliably accessible through
> the web and (c) are machine-processible.
And (d) use shared vocabulary services rather than local term lists
whenever possible?
Making more of existing resources is hugely important so I'm really glad to
see this discussion happening and (popping my 'MCG Chair' hat on for a
minute), let me know if there's anything we can do to help continue
discussions at events or online.
Cheers, Mia
* If you're interested in that, an article I wrote on 'Where next for open
cultural data in museums?' went live on Museum-iD magazine ā€¸yesterday
http://www.museum-id.com/idea-detail.asp?id=387
****************************************************************
website: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
[un]subscribe: http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************
|