[open-bibliography] Linked Data for Libraries (LD4L) project

Mon Feb 3 21:18:02 UTC 2014

We're very much focused on going beyond catalog data. But making licensed
journal metadata public isn't part of our charter. We'd like it and support
it, but it's not going to be where we're spending our time.

- David W.

On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:32 PM, Adrian Pohl <adrian.pohl at okfn.org> wrote:

> Thank you all for your responses.
>
> I had previously heard about Cornell's project to provide unified
> discovery via a blacklight (open source) interface and wondered whether the
> LD4L project would address the whole range of the data underlying discovery
> tools or just the catalog metadata. I hoped that libraries would move one
> step further with addressing free reuse/open licensing of metadata in
> contract negotiations with content providers. (See also the openbiblio blog
> post in reaction to the EBSCO and Ex Libris slap fight:
> http://openbiblio.net/2013/06/23/discovery-silos-vs-the-open-web/.)
>
> David, please let us know if there is any chance if the project might also
> address this issue. Someone will have to make a start...
>
> - Adrian
>
>
>
> On 3 February 2014 20:50, David Weinberger <self at evident.com> wrote:
>
>> Since the aim is to demonstrate library Linked Data's practical value
>>  for scholarly/educational communities, we'll do as much
>> reconciliation/linking as we can, which will inevitably be less than we'd
>> like.
>>
>> We're pretty much at Day #2 of this project. There will be more details
>> as we work through the issues, preferably with the advice and help of the
>> entire community, including you.
>>
>> David W.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Ian Ibbotson <ian.ibbotson at k-int.com>wrote:
>>
>>> (apologies if I'm just re-posting info already seen)
>>>
>>> I think @azaroth42 [twitter] might be a good man to ask for details on
>>> this.. Some responses to the "and we're off" posting, asking about license
>>> etc here:
>>> http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2014/02/01/linked-data-for-libraries-and-were-off/....
>>>
>>> ..Yes, we are aiming at public domain. The following is from page 3 of
>>> the proposal:
>>>
>>> "While Linked Data can be used internally within an institution or
>>> across a collaborative group, it becomes much more valuable when it is
>>> Linked Open Data, and is publicly shared using an open license such as the
>>> Creative Commons CC-BY[1] or CC0[2] licenses, or the United Kingdom's Open
>>> Government License[3]. For our Linked Data for Libraries project, our
>>> intention is that all SRSIS instances will share Linked Open Data with the
>>> world."
>>>
>>> Dean Krafft adds: Since we're publishing our own metadata, and we don't
>>> actually have a lot of metadata for journal articles, there won't be a lot
>>> of that in the mix. But what we do have should definitely be open.
>>>
>>> Ian Ibbotson
>>> Director
>>> Knowledge Integration Ltd
>>> 35 Paradise Street, Sheffield. S3 8PZ
>>> T: 0114 273 8271
>>> M: 07968 794 630
>>> W: http://www.k-int.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3 February 2014 19:07, Tom Morris <tfmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Adrian.  Does anyone have any information on what they're
>>>> actually doing?  Is this going to result in yet another mega dump of
>>>> unreconciled/unlinked bibliographic RDF data or are they actually going to
>>>> make an attempting at linking things in a useful fashion?
>>>>
>>>> Stanford was actually involved in a linked data experiment back in 2010
>>>> when a good chunk of their catalog was loaded into Freebase and matched up
>>>> with Freebase topics.  You can see a list of the book editions here:
>>>> https://www.freebase.com/authority/stanford/control?links&lang=en&sort=timestamp
>>>> If you look at an edition, you'll see that they're each linked back to
>>>> the Stanford OPAC system. For example, these two editions:
>>>>     https://www.freebase.com/m/075ngj1
>>>>     https://www.freebase.com/m/0c60n0m
>>>> are linked both their original catalog entries and to this work:
>>>>     https://www.freebase.com/m/075nhtg
>>>> and the topic for the author Donn Byrne<https://www.freebase.com/m/02x79g1> which
>>>> is further linked to Wikipedia, OpenLibrary, VIAF, IMDB, and LC NAF.
>>>>
>>>> That's all a long-winded way of saying that Stanford University Library
>>>> has a pretty good start on producing Linked Data today.
>>>>
>>>> Cornell has some linked data for their OPAC too, although I don't think
>>>> its as extensive as the Stanford data.  I think it's mostly derived from
>>>> the metadata associated with Google Books scans.  If you look at this
>>>> edition <https://www.freebase.com/m/04w0sxn> of Flatland<https://www.freebase.com/m/0j_mj> you
>>>> can see that it's linked to both Cornell's OPAC as well as the LC and
>>>> OpenLibrary records for that edition, while the work entry is linked to
>>>> Wikipedia and ISFDB <http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?1933>.
>>>>  (It should be linked to the OpenLibrary work page too, but OpenLibrary
>>>> didn't yet have works when the original Freebase linking was done, so
>>>> that's a gap in the linkage.
>>>>
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Adrian Pohl <adrian.pohl at okfn.org>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Mellon-funded Linked Data for Libraries (LD4L) project at Cornell,
>>>>> Harvard and Stanford might bring things forward regarding the
>>>>> availability of open bibliographic data on the web. See the recent
>>>>> blog post on the project by David Weinberger.[1]
>>>>>
>>>>> In the December announcement[2] of the project from Harvard it reads:
>>>>> "Ultimately, the goal of the project is to create a system that pulls
>>>>> information out of its existing silos--like library catalogs, finding
>>>>> aids, reading lists and more--into a common format that people can use
>>>>> to  find and understand information. This new system would apply to
>>>>> all scholarly and creative disciplines, including the sciences, the
>>>>> arts and  the humanities."
>>>>>
>>>>> The question is whether the project's goal is linked _open_ data, i.e.
>>>>> publishing large amounts of bibliographic data for journal articles
>>>>> etc. under an open license. Or whether the goal is to have the data on
>>>>> the web as linked data but without open licensing...
>>>>>
>>>>> Can anybody on this list provide some more information on this project
>>>>> regarding openbiblio data?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Adrian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2014/02/01/linked-data-for-libraries-and-were-off/
>>>>> [2]
>>>>> http://library.harvard.edu/12162013-1308/harvard-cornell-stanford-libraries-project-receives-grant
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> open-bibliography mailing list
>>>>> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
>>>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-bibliography
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> open-bibliography mailing list
>>>> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
>>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-bibliography
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> open-bibliography mailing list
>>> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
>>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-bibliography
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-bibliography mailing list
>> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-bibliography
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-bibliography/attachments/20140203/9bf4c340/attachment-0003.html>