[open-bibliography] introduction

• Previous message: [open-bibliography] introduction
• Next message: [open-bibliography] introduction
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:20 AM, MJ Ray <mjr at phonecoop.coop> wrote:

> Jonathan Gray wrote:
> > [...] Any evidence or arguments about why Europeana should make the
> > bibliographic metadata *open* (as in opendefinition.org) would be very
> > much appreciated! In particular I understand that many libraries
> > currently want to release with NC restrictions.
>
> First of all: hello from me.  I'm interested in Open Bibliographic
> Data because I'm a member of a tech worker co-op that provides
> computer-related services to libraries and other clients around the
> world, including open standards-based EDIFACT and RFID support.  I'm a
> bit worried by the actions of the largest library co-op, OCLC, and I'd
> like Open Bibliographic Data to succeed and become its own compelling
> argument for OCLC to switch.  OCLC has big databases, but it may be
> possible to persuade OCLC members to open it up.--
>

I think this is well put. I see OKF's role as cretaing outputs that
persuades organizations to change - we do not de facto intend to replace
them. But institutions that refuse to change are likely to have a tough
struggle to survive.

Ideally we'd like to see a future where commercial or quasi-commercial
organizations see the value of creating a market for Open knowledge.

P.



Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-bibliography/attachments/20100630/e1e6f3d2/attachment-0001.html>

• Previous message: [open-bibliography] introduction
• Next message: [open-bibliography] introduction
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]