This is very interesting indeed. Thanks for sharing, Jon.

I do agree with Bruce that this is less about models than the "others
stuff", but also think that "other stuff" -- tooling, serializations &
best practices -- are squarely in the DC Architecture & DCAM / DCAP

Also, wrt:
>>who often wish that we had access too a broader set of perspectives in dc-arch

I've been trying really hard to pull archivists & a few digital
humanities folks into these discussions, with some success. Part of it
is publicizing our discussions more effectively, but we've definitely
added new blood to the Arch Forum lately. I have on my todo list to
write a summary of the past few weeks' discussions and post to lod-lam
& code4lib to continue pulling people in, and I'm planning to give a
Record <-> Graph <-> Record, DCAM-filled lightening talk at code4lib
here in Seattle next week.

I'm open to other suggestions about where we can reach out to for some
additional perspective.

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 8:17 AM, Bruce D'Arcus <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Jon Phipps <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> This post represents an interesting perspective from the scientific data
>> community on some of the challenges to implementing semantic web solutions
>> and integrating them into existing system architectures and programming
>> models. This certainly looks to me like a place where the DCAP/DCAM
>> architecture coupled with some concrete implementation examples could be of
>> benefit...
> FWIW, I think the issue is much less about models than it is about the
> other stuff.
> Bruce

Corey A Harper
Metadata Services Librarian
New York University Libraries
20 Cooper Square, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10003-7112
[log in to unmask]