[okfn-discuss] Submitting comments to the Library of Congress?

Thu Dec 13 19:58:40 UTC 2007

Hi Luis,

Thank you very much for your suggested edits!

However I wonder whether it could be too late to make any alterations 
given that not all signatories will be on okfn-discuss, and there's no 
easy way to confirm all changes with all signatories.

What do people think?

Regards,

Jonathan

Luis Villa wrote:
> On Dec 13, 2007 5:09 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org> wrote:
>   
>> Just to update everyone: thanks to Aaron's efforts we've now got a final
>> version of the response at:
>>
>>    http://okfn.org/wiki/FutureOfBibliographicControl
>>
>> It's now nice and short so please do take a look and sign if you're
>> happy to (and please circulate to anyone else who might be interested).
>> It needs to be submitted tomorrow (Friday) so you'll want to do this
>> sooner rather than later :)
>>     
>
> Suggested edits (there are so many, and some so substantive, I didn't
> want to make them in the wiki without running them by people first):
>
> style edits:
> * 'including people from' -> 'including representatives from'
> * 'access and re-use without restriction.' -> 'unrestricted access and re-use'
> * 'access, re-use and re-distribution without restriction.' ->
> 'unrestricted access, re-use and re-distribution'
> * 'simpler feedback' -> 'unimpeded feedback'
> * 'but will also' -> 'but it will also'
> * 'as well as many other possibilities we cannot predict in advance.'
> -> 'and many other benefits that can't be predicted in advance.'
>
> content changing edits:
> * add links for Open Access Journals/Open Educational resources/Open
> Data; at least to the relevant Wikipedia articles if nothing else.
> * 'incredible rise in community-led development and innovative uses.'
> -> 'incredible increase in innovative development, contribution, and
> use by communities, corporations, and governments'
> * 'that more bibliographic data' -> 'that all bibliographic data' or
> 'that bibliographic data'
>
> Blowing up the very long second sentence of the third paragraph,
> structurally and some content:
>
> "Not only will this allow libraries to share records more efficiently
> and improve quality more rapidly through better, simpler feedback, but
> will also make possible more advanced online sites for book-lovers,
> easier analysis by social scientists, interesting visualizations and
> summary statistics by journalists and others, as well as many other
> possibilities we cannot predict in advance."
>
> ->
>
> "This would have many predictable benefits: efficient record-sharing
> and high-quality feedback for libraries, more advanced online sites
> for students and book lovers, and better analysis and visualizations
> by social scientists. Perhaps more importantly, increasing openness
> always leads to benefits that can't be predicted ahead of time, since
> it radically increases the number of people who can experiment and
> innovate to fulfill their own serious needs and creative whims."
>   