[open-bibliography] introduction

[Patrick Peiffer]

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 6:53 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle at kcoyle.net> wrote:

> Quoting Jonathan Gray <jonathan.gray at okfn.org>:
>
>  Just to follow up from this -- I understand that the libraries
>> involved in Europeana are in final stages of negotiating licensing
>> terms. 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.
>>
>
> One argument is that, AFAIK, no one has come up with a way for the license
> terms to travel with the metadata through the many transitions that metadata
> naturally goes through. This is particularly true if we move away from
> record-based metadata into statement-based metadata.
>
> kc
>
>
Karen, yes! that's exactly the kind of tangible benefit and concrete reason
where non-nc is the better choice that i'll be looking for around here.

cheers, patrickp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-bibliography/attachments/20100630/6efe5f17/attachment-0002.html>