I'm glad to see some pointers to issues of privacy and different governing legal regimes internationally. These issues are really important, particularly for living people.
Another activity that may be relevant is the Virtual International Authority File:
http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/viaf/
Since it derives initially from name authority files used by libraries, the scope of VIAF will primarily be people who have written (or created ) works that libraries collect and people that have been written about.
Caroline Arms
Library of Congress, Office of Strategic Initiatives
PS *** Views expressed are personal, not those of the Library of Congress ***
>>> Cecil Somerton <[log in to unmask]> 12/11/06 9:53 AM >>>
Folks,
For emerging discussion on people and identity please see http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_12/schneider/index.html
Thanks
Cecil E. Somerton
Information Management Analyst | Analyste de gestion de l'information
IM Strategies | Stratégies de la gestion de l'information
Chief Information Officer Branch | Direction du dirigeant principal de l'information
Treasury Board of Canada, Secretariat | Secrétariat du Conseil du Trésor du Canada
Ottawa, Canada K1A 0R5
613 946-5053 | [log in to unmask] | facsimile/télécopieur 613 946-9342
-----Original Message-----
From: General DCMI discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Andrew Wilson
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 5:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: people metadata
Exactly. What Pete says - the Agents WG is not limited in the way that
Liddy suggests. John Robert and I, the co-chairs of DC-Agents, have
been trying to get interest and involvement for the last couple of
years with absolutely no result. The Agents WG is working on developing
a way of describing agents - at the moment we are changing the WG into
a task Group consisting intially of myself, Dan Brickley, and Tom Baker
to look at whether and how FOAF meets the needs of the DC community for
describing agents. Perhaps this discussion could be copied to the
DC-Agents email list?
cheers
Andrew Wilson
Quoting Pete Johnston <[log in to unmask]>:
> Liddy,
>
>> I think that DC agents is a group who are working on what should be
>> the DC way to approach vales for such elements as creator,
>> contributor, publisher, etc while I think the encyclopaedia people
>> want to describe people, not resources....
>
> Sorry, I don't understand the distinction you are making here.
>
> People are resources. In the terms of the DCMI Abstract Model, the
> "values" for the creator, contributor, publisher etc properties _are_
> people (well, they are "entities" or "agents", which might also be
> resources other than people, like organisations or services).
>
> So, as Irvin says, yes, this - the description of agents - is
> _exactly_ the remit of the DC Agents WG. Scanning the mailing list
> archive
>
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/DC-AGENTS.html
>
> suggests that the Agents WG has received almost no interest for at
> least the last couple of years.
>
> Pete
>
--
Andrew Wilson
[log in to unmask]
