156 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2022
    1. Diskurs in der Profession,

      Das ist doch ein eigener Punkt neben der Wissensvermittlung. Statt Diskurs würde es führ die Lehre auch reichen wenn jemand einfach vorgibt was wichtig ist.

    2. dass Hochschulen keine Lehrbücher mehr produzieren

      Die Aussage klingt hier plausibel aber ohne Blick auf andere Fachgebiete kann ich das nicht so nachvollziehen. Vielleicht mal Bibliothekar*innen fragen welche aktuellen Lehrbücher es in den verschiedenen Wissenschaften so gibt und ob sie weniger geworden sind?

    3. wie so ein Lehrbuch in Zukunft fortgeschrieben würde

      Wurden denn in der Vergangenheit die Lehrbücher fortgeschrieben? Die dargelegten Phasen zeigen doch, dass es auch bisher keine Kontinuität gab.

    4. bei denen oft keine Struktur im Hintergrund steht, welche diese kontinuierliche Überarbeitung garantiert

      Ok, die gibt es bei Wikipedia auch nicht, lediglich vom Anspruch her.

    5. en Konsens in der Profession. Wenn es keinen Konsens zu einem Thema gibt, wäre es eine Aufgabe, die unterschiedlichen Positionen darzustellen und zu sagen, warum es diese gibt.


    6. möglichst vollständig

      Das ist viel und erinnert mich an den Anspruch von Wikipedia "das Wissen der Welt" zu sammeln. Ich bezweifle, dass je ein solch vollständiges Lehrbuch existiert. Das einzige was da heranreicht ist Knuths "The Art of Computer Programming", was aber kein Lehrbuch sondern ein Handbuch ist.

  2. May 2022
    1. physical characteristics

      what about digital entities? This rarely refers to a storage medium, does it?

    2. This is mainly a problem

      Yes, that the mayor problem of the model.

    3. Library Reference Model as

      Reading the definitions, the "Manifestation" looks dispensable or disconnected at least. Work, expression and item are connected:

      • work is content
      • expression is signs conveying content
      • item carries signs

      But how does manifestation make use of signs?

  3. Sep 2021
    1. To separate the two facets of a language, we need two items

      For what reason? To support model-theory? Wikidata supports people, not theories!

    2. it is an occurrence of ananti-pattern, since it is a recurrenterror-prone structure


    3. multiple interpretations: is French meantto be referring to a type of language or a specific, particular language

      how about both?

    4. meaning that everyinstance of the former is also an instance of the latte

      This is a very strong assumption.

    5. logical, ontological and semantic considerations

      How about practical or semiotic considerations? Language is not primarily logical, ontological or semantic?

    6. Types are predicative entities, whose instances share some general characteristics

      No. Types are just sets of things.

  4. Jul 2020
    1. ServicesWe provide a several applictaions, data sets and APIs for public use.

      Why is this centered? Better left-align as the rest of the page.

    1. → Start Cocoda instance optimized for RVK→ Start Cocoda instance optimized for Wikidata

      Eigener Unterpunkt "Instances"

    2. German user manual (A4 PDF / foldable sheets)

      Nur auf die Deutsche Seite. /cocoda/ wäre die wichtigste Seite um sie auch in Deutsch anzubieten, oder?

    1. nach oben

      Pfeil-nach-oben davor

    2. { "notation": [ "700.90440747471" ], "memberList": [ { "uri": "http://dewey.info/class/700/e23/", "notation": "700" }, { "uri": "http://dewey.info/class/1--09044/e23/", "notation": "T1--09044" }, { "uri": "http://dewey.info/class/1--074/e23/", "notation": "T1--074" }, { "uri": "http://dewey.info/class/2--7471/e23/", "notation": "T2--7471" } ] }

      dito Quellcode: Rahmen, Hintergrund, Schatten o.Ö.

    3. In

      Screenshots brauchen einen Rahmen, Schatten o.Ä. Effekt um sich vom Layout abzuheben

    1. VZG

      Link weg, sonnst als ein Link "VZG Dienste" gelesen

    2. starte hier

      Zwei Buttons: "Anwendung starten" (direkt zu Cocoda release version) und "über Cocoda" (bisheriger link)

    1. Subpages: Software ・ Data ・ Licenses

      Besser alles auf eine Seite statt Unterseiten. Sowohl Unterpunkte als auch Unterseiten ist komisch

    2. Statt deutsche und US-Flagge für die Sprachauswahl besser Sprache "English" und "Deutsch" (vgl. https://usersnap.com/blog/design-language-switch/)

    1. News Services Cocoda KOS Types KOS Registry Concordance Registry Mappings API Partners Publications Software Data Licenses Contact
      • Partners vor Contact nach Rechts verschieben
      • Beim dropdown die Einträge linksbündig
  5. May 2020
    1. how it is defined and formatted, as shown in brackets above. This is about self-declaring data

      There is no "self-declaring data" but several promises such as XML, and RDF. Better refer to an existing standard. I'd recommend using URIs but these tend to become long

    2. to specify which method/system is being used for the data.

      This only shifts the problem one level up unless you define where the method/system-identifier come from. For instance why orcidIDinstead of ORCID, https://orcid.org/ or some other string?

    3. [ {"name":"8:23am, Tuesday, 13th of May 2020", "2,208,988,800":"typeNTP"}, [ {"name":"14th & Madison, NY", "Latitude: 40 degrees, 42 minutes, 51 seconds N":"latlong"}, [ {"name":"David Millard", "0000-0002-7512-2710, "person":"orcidID"},

      Is this an instance of JSON as described below but without <json> in front?

      Why [ on each line end , at the end, so it's no valid JSON?

    4. [ {"name":"Acknowledgements", "level":"level1"}, {"name":"Contents", "level":"level1"}, {"name":"the future of text : DEAR READER", "level":"level1"}, {"name":"Dear Reader of The Distant Future", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Dear Reader of Today", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"the future of text : introduction", "level":"level1"}, {"name":"HOW TO READ THIS BOOK IN READER", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"on symbols", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Welcome", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"linearising", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Arming the Citizenry: Deeper Literacies", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Myriad Texts", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Addressing", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Point", "level":"level3"}, {"name":"Cite", "level":"level3"}, {"name":"Link", "level":"level3"}, {"name":"Analogue / Real World Addressing", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Digital Addressing", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Evolution", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"the future of text : Articles", "level":"level1"}, {"name":"Adam Cheyer", "level":"level2"}, {"name":"Adam Kampff", "level":"level2"},

      Starting with [and ending with , this is no complete JSON.

    1. stored in the Layer attribute

      Repeatable? Can a standoff property be part of multiple layers?

    2. JSON export

      Why not based on a W3C Web Annotation Data Model? See https://www.w3.org/TR/annotation-model/#fragment-selector and RFC 5147.

    3. IsZeroPoint

      Could be omitted if EndIndex is optional instead

    4. This is an optional attribute to make it easier to view standoff properties in the database

      I think this is also how hypothes.is does it.

    5. the order in which the standoff property was created.

      why not a timestamp instead?

    6. A string representing data

      So this is not a string anymore but a more complex data structure!

    7. plain text

      how is plain text defined? A sequence of Unicode characters in normalized form? which normalization? this is essential to get stable character positions!

      See https://discourse.suttacentral.net/t/standoff-markups/2731/10 for background on standoff properties and Unicode

    8. The removal of embedded markup

      as first called for by Nelson (1997) in Embedded Markup Considered Harmful

    9. It is planned to extend the system with a feature to import ontologies – such as OWL ontologies – into the concept subgraph to save the user the labour of entering them manually.

      to keep (establish) a connection between existing ontologies and the ontologies in Codex, it should be possible to assign equivalent URIs to concept entities.

    10. A text annotation in Codex is an annotation that relates a region of text in a text entity to a different text entity.

      To concatenate two pieces of text use a structure entity that links both or a text annotation that directly links both?

    11. as little

      Is the empty string allowed in a text entity?

    12. discussed later in the section


    13. 2.2.2 Claims

      Looks a lot like Wikidata qualifiers

    14. They are composable within a hierarchy

      thus building an ontology

    15. features distinguishing it from simple relationships or edges in a graph database

      eventually this makes the set of entities and meta-relations a knowledge graph. Why not use this established terminology? A Graph databases is a technical method to store graphs, including knowledge graphs.

  6. Oct 2019
    1. Size and region parameters given as percentages and the rotation parameter allow positive floating point number values

      The canonical size does not allow percentage values, does it?

    1. Other Citation Info

      This could be anything. How about dublin core element set?

    2. Location

      Location of what?

    3. ISBN

      Why? Better "identifiers (DOI, ISBN, handle...)" instead.

    4. Link Type. Is the citation being referred to because the author agrees or disagrees with it?

      There is some research in link types and citation types to build on, e.g. https://sparontologies.github.io/cito/current/cito.html

    5. Immutable. The document cannot change.

      An argument for content-based identifiers. I think it's wanted to link different versions of a document with each other to allow for updates

    6. High Resolution Addressable. At different levels of granularity,

      Deep links via content locators, see https://github.com/jakobib/hypertext2019#readme

    1. all the available citation meta information

      Which is what information? What information is actually needed for citation?

  7. Sep 2019
    1. No modern software engineer would choose to work without an IDE

      I doubt so, unless emacs and vim are also counted as IDEs. IDEs are useful but they build on tools which can be used independently (editor, compiler, debugger...).

    1. Indexed the proceedings for Hypertext '87, '91, '93, and ECHT '94 conferences. Currently am creating a global index and hypertext for all the SigWeb (formerly SigLink) hypertext conferences since 1987

      We could index it in Wikidata as part of WikiCite.

    1. @glossary{ term = {Name of glossary term}, definition = {freeform definition text}, relates to = {relationship – “other term”},  term = {Name of glossary term number two}, definition = {freeform definition text}, relates to = {relationship – “other term”}, }

      That's basically SKOS but could also be expressed in another format, e.g.:

        "Name of glossary term": {
          "definition": "...",
          "relationship": ["other term"]
        "Name of glossary term number two": {
          "definition": "...",
          "relationship": ["other term"]
    2. @citations{ inline = {superscript number}, section name = {References}, section format = {author last name, author first name, title, date, place, publisher},

      There are thousands of citation styles defined at https://citationstyles.org/. Either reference a style or use a subset of CSL to specificy the style (instead of inventing your own citation style definition language).

    3. @formating{ heading level 1 = {Helvetica, 22pt, bold}, heading level 2 = {Helvetica, 18, bold}, body = {Times, 12pt}, image captions = {‘Times, l4, italic, align centre},

      I don't understand the use case of including this information.

    4. @article{ author = {Douglas Carl Engelbart}, title = {AUGMENTING HUMAN INTELLECT – A Conceptual Framework}, month = jul, year = {1962}, institution = {SR1},

      In condense CSL-JSON this would be:

      {"author":[{"family":"Engelbart","given":"Douglas Carl"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[[1962,7]]},"title":"AUGMENTING HUMAN INTELLECT – A Conceptual Framework","type":"article"}

      institution is not supported by citation formats, so not included here. title: AUGMENTING HUMAN INTELLECT – A Conceptual Framework "type": "article" \ ~~~

    5. Scholarcy, 2019,08,01

      What does this mean? Is the source build of multiple data elements such as name and date? Can it be any arbitrary string?

    6. Any choice of a metadata format consists of two aspects:

      1. serialization format (CSV, XML, YAML, JSON, RDF/Turtle, Cusztom...)
      2. semantics (which fields, hierarchy, ontology...)

      The most common serialization format is JSON so this seems as best choice. To save space, JSON5, a less strict superset of JSON syntax might be allowed.

      The data format semantic are likely custom but interoperability with existing data models is recommended.

    7. in the style of the BiTeX Export format

      "in the style of" means it is not BibTeX but requires a custom parser which is a barrier of adoption.

    1. The first implementations will include links to actual code

      In the spirit of Open Science I'd first make code public before talking about it. Unfortunately this is not academic standard yet, but as a reviewer I'd reject all works describing new software without actually making the software available

    2. Examples and description of the format is posted: Visible-Meta Example & Structure.

      Looks like the whole approach could easily be changed to from BibTeX to a more standardized format (CSL JSON, RDF/Turtle, or JSON-LD). These formats can better be converted to BibTeX (see for instance https://citation.js.org/) than the other way round

    3. This could put an end to the absurd academic time-waste of nit-picking how citations should be displayed: Let the teacher/examiner/reader specify how the citations should be displayed, based on the document having described in the appendix how they are used and therefore the reader can re-format the the readers tastes.

      Have a look at Citation Stylesheet Language. If the bibliographic data is available in (or convertible to) CSL JSON, the formatting can be chosen by readers.

    4. the publishing and freezing onto PDF is no longer a limitation

      There is a whole movement to get beyond the PDF for academic documents (e.g. Scholarly Markdown, interactive documents...). PDF is a dead end.

    5. augmented Readers

      If augmented reader applications are needed anyway, why build on an outdated, limited technology to express metadata (BibteX) instead of RDF? The metadata could visibly be put in RDF/Turtle or JSON-LD format.

    6. Putting the metadata visually into the document means that even if the document format is changed or the document is printed and scanned, the data will still be a part of the document and compatibility with legacy readers is maintained since they will only see the metadata as plain text

      This seems to be the major difference of this approach to other methods of embedding metadata in documents.

  8. Jun 2019
    1. SHA-1 hashes

      A reviewer noted the SHA-1 as bad idea, "since these are not reversible in a computational feasible way and also could generate collisions" and rasked why not to "use the variable names from above? (I.e., 'take d2, insert at c2, ...'.". I should better introduce SHA-1 in a second step.

    2. This generalization can be useful to track data processing pipelines as hyperdata such as discussed for executable papers and reproducible research.

      As noted by a reviewer the point made here is difficult to follow. This sentence should be extended withbackground information.

  9. May 2019
    1. BitTorrent Merkle-Hashe

      See http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0030.html. Unfortunately Merkle-Hashes are not widely used within the Torrent network.

    2. IPFS Mulihashes

      See https://github.com/w3c-dvcg/multihash and https://github.com/multiformats/multihash. This looks promising but not cleanly seperated from other goals and it's lacking an URI representation.

  10. Mar 2019
    1. This is how Git really works. It has its own diff engine(s) (and accepts plugins), and has basically a full understanding of how changes are made and how to merge them

      Should be no problem. See copy-on-write file systems for implementations.

    2. addressing of the commits

      Why not? The commit can include a link to the original content. This would still create new addresses for each modification of a document.

    3. mutability in content addressing systems

      What's the basic problem here? A document should be addressable under the same identifier despite being changed over time. Depending on your notion of "document" this could be impossible (see https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2008.14504503143)

    4. the address is some query

      In this case the address is delegated to another authority to look up the current file content.

    5. The system cannot always resolve merge conflicts

      Only a problem if edits independently take place at different places.

    6. Each file has a useful content address

      So the content address changes only if the file content changes. This is no problem if files are never changed.

    7. meta-data

      A name that links to a file is just an example of meta-data.

    8. after Jesse’s comments

      What did he say?

  11. Nov 2018
    1. Wikidatahas still a lower normative burden of rules and policies than Wikipedia

      Hopefully this will not change too fast!

    2. For the second, we could try to detect inconsistencies, eitherby inspecting samples of the class hierarchy

      Yes, that's what I do when doing quality work on the taxonomy (with the tool wdtaxonomy)

    3. these are not the only reason behindthe trends observed. An examination of the peaks

      See http://wikicite.org/statistics.html for similar phases and events better analysed by history instead of calculations.

    4. Wikidata quality assessment

      I guess the the average values are spoiled by outliers. A look at distribution would be interesting instead of average and median value only.

    5. Ontology depth

      I'm curious about the depth distribution to compare my findings on other classification systems, including Wikipedia categories: https://arxiv.org/abs/cs/0604036

    6. Possible relations between Items

      This only includes properties of data-type item?! It should be made more clear because the majority of Wikidata classes has other data types.

    7. sed in the present analysis

      I'd add number of classes with connected Wikipedia articles because these provide definition and context

    8. We used the following keywords:‘ontology metrics’, ‘ontology evaluation framework’, and ‘ontology evaluation’. From the results,we selected only papers including primarily structural metrics.

      A similar study on metrics and evaluation of classifications, taxonomies, thesaurus and other knowledge organization systems would be interesting!

    9. and as such not connected to editing activities

      Other aspects of Wikidata ontology quality can also be connected to editing activities but this cannot be measure from the Wikidata data dumps. It would need to take into account external data such as applications that make use of Wikidata (Histropedia, Wikipedia instances...)

    10. Creating KGs is not trivial.

      This applies to universal KG in particular. Domain specific KGs can have any level of complexity - can they still be called knowledge graphs then?

    11. A KG typically spans across several domains and is built on topof a conceptual schema, orontology, which defines what types of entities (classes) are allowed inthe graph, alongside the types ofpropertiesthey can have

      Wikidata differs from typical KG as it is not build on top of classes (entity types). Any item (entity) can be connected by any property. Wikidata's only strict "classes" in the sense of KG classes are its data types (item, lemma, monolingual string...).

  12. Sep 2018
  13. Aug 2018
    1. Elec­tronic Recording Machine Accounting (ERMA)

      It also introduced bank account numbers, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Recording_Machine,_Accounting

    2. Vene­tians

      The Venetian Republic which lasted a millennium is famous for its archival practice. It virtually documented everything.

    1. Sie wird unser aller Leben verbessern

      So wie Zugang zu Trinkwasser und Gesundheitsversorgung?!

    2. KIs bauen will, die künftig erhebliche Verantwortung in der realen Welt übernehmen

      KIs können keine Verantwortung übernehmen, das können nur Menschen als ethische Wesen!

    1. Habe ich einBuch, das für mich Verſtand hat, einen Seelſor¬ger, der für mich Gewiſſen hat, einen Arzt der fürmich die Diät beurtheilt, u. ſ. w. ſo brauche ich michja nicht ſelbſt zu bemühen. Ich habe nicht nöthigzu denken, wenn ich nur bezahlen kann; anderewerden das verdrießliche Geſchäft ſchon für michübernehmen.

      Kant über künstliche Intelligenz

  14. May 2017
    1. we should be critical with over-emphasising metadata as a different category, and accompanying it with myriads of specifically designed technologies and tools as we often see in digital humanities

      and in libraries

    2. metadata is not made of a difference substance, and does not possess a different essence, as compared to plain data. They both are made of the same stuff, so to speak. But some data, which happens to represent other data rather than other kinds of things in the world, may play a meta role in some circumstances.

      Thanks for this paragraph!

    3. we must conclude that metadata should be treated as any other data. We can use the same tools, languages, approaches and techniques to deal with metadata as we do for plain data. We don’t need specifically designed repositories to hold metadata; good old databases should be enough. We don’t need metadata standards; data standards should work. We don’t need metadata schemas; data schemas should do


    4. we should conclude that we were wrong in asserting that all fruit is juicy

      Note that the Liskov substitution principle does not apply to things like fruits and bananas but about our concepts of this things. The world is not made of categories and sub-categories but humans structure and describe the world this way.

    5. represents

      There may be a subtle difference between "is about" and "represents" but nevermind

    6. type 1 metadata should not be called “metadata” at all, but data structure, data schema, data model, or something like that, depending on your preferences and your particular field of expertise

      In my PhD thesis I summarized it as "methods, technologies, standards, and languages exist to structure and describe data" and identified general patterns in this ways to structure and describe data.

    7. we can strip data of its type 2 metadata

      Nope. If we remove metadata type 2, e.g. "LastUpdatedTime", from a piece of data, still there is a time when the piece of data was updated. The information about this time is just not stored (=made explicit). The same applies to type 1 metadata with explicit schemas, data types etc. and implicit assumptions about the structure of data.

    8. we cannot enter data in a database if we haven’t decided on what structure it will have first

      Well, we can, but in these case the data lacks metadata for proper understanding or processing. For instance we could write and store a name as string e.g "Luxemburg, Rosa", implicitly assuming the schema given, surname. Such schema, once documented, would be metadata.

    9. such as the field names and types in a database schema

      that is the original use of the term in computer science as introduced by Philip Bagley (1968)

    10. important concept

      the concept is important in other domain as well but not under the name "metadata"

    11. in digital humanities

      and in libraries as well

  15. Mar 2017
    1. Wikipedia, with its open access editing, open data mining, discussion pages, version control, and encyclopedic scope is another model for bibliographic community building

      article should mention WikiCite and Wikidata

    2. There are still relatively few tools that provide a simple interface, without forcing users to wrangle with command line utilities and XML or JSoN serializations. As Kolkman suggests, there may be a deficit in education, outreach, and/or community-building, which inhibits the adoption of the most promising vocabulary management tools

      Rules of bibliographic data are often hidden in tools that make use of the data. Each tool implies its own rules to the data. Separating rules from tools (e.g. with schema files) can help but schemas are rarely applied to bibliographic data because they would uncover a lot of data as invalid/broken.

    3. Given that bibliographic vocabularies used outside traditional centralized distribution are, by nature, highly interdependent, they stand to benefit greatly from semantic versioning

      This would require a definition of "functionality" of bibliographic vocabularies.

    4. knowledge organization systems

      Is KOS used as more general concept or as synonym to "vocabularies"?

    5. foundation for creating and maintaining Web-based vocabularies

      There are some general guidelines but I doubt that mixing rules for three types of vocabularies is helpful. Otherwise we end up with general rules about any kind of data.

    6. Bibliographic data fall into three general categories

      Ok, the article is not about vocabularies but about bibliographic vocabularies as defined here. In my words:

      • individual bibliographic records
      • bibliographic data formats and models
      • terminologies and other controlled vocabularies
    7. maintenance and repair studies

      libraries have long been part of infrastructure run by public services. Interesting to compare with maintenance of other infrastructures. There seems to exist a general trend to prefer building new infrastructure instead of maintaining the existing one.

    8. vocabularies

      This term can be understood in many different ways. The article should better have given a definition of "vocabularies".

  16. Apr 2016
  17. Mar 2016
    1. die im Unterschied zu anderen ikonischen Formen bestimmten Regeln unterliegt.

      Regeln, Notationen, Mustern, Grammatiken...

    2. diagrammatische Darstellungen in der Wissensorganisation?

      Und wie hängen diese Darstellungen mit Kapitel 3.9 (S. 151-158) meiner Dissertation (http://aboutdata.org/) zusammen?

    3. um neue Formen der Wissensorganisation zu entwickeln.

      Dafür sollte schon die Überführung vorhandener Formen in Diagramme genügen! Hier bleibt der Artikel leider etwas unkonkret zumal Semantic Web und Conceptual Graphs eher aus der Informatik statt aus LIS kommen.

    4. In traditionellen Wissensorganisationssystemen wie Klassifikationen und Thesauri lassen sich mit natürlicher Sprache drei semantische Relationen darstellen: Äquivalenz, Assoziation und Hierarchien

      Hier wäre ein Überblick über vorhandene Visualisierungsen von Wissensorganisationssystemen hilfreich (Baumdiagramm u.A.)

    5. sentential representation systems in the history of modern logic has obscured several important facts about diagrammatic systems

      Es handelt sich in beiden Fällen um Formalismen, d.h. Diagramme können gleichwertig zu formalen Sprachen behandelt werden.

    6. Evidenzsuggestion

      Woher stammt der Begriff? Tobias Kraft (2014, S.98) führt diesen Artikel als Quelle an, obgleich der Begriff hier nur einmal verwendet wird.

  18. Dec 2015
    1. yep

    2. Diane Hillmann

      sorry for not having her on my active radar yet. She seems not to have spoken at SWIB yet (?)

    3. So linked data has got good marketing and a critical mass, in an environment where decision-makers want to do something but don’t know what to do.


    4. of vocabulary consensus and implementation. That’s not a problem that linked data solves.

      linked data does not "solve it" but at least it "addresses it".

    5. We primarily need common identifiers in use between systems

      Almost all I do with Linked Data is primarily introduction and enforcement of identifiers and creation of domain models. RDF is only secondary to express the outcome of this relevant work. Sure it could also be done with other technology but if it is done, RDF is a natural choice.

    6. who can’t always even give us a reliable list in any format at all of what titles with what coverage dates are included in our license

      What do we pay them thousands of $€ for?! Why do we still buy this crap?

    7. to figure out when a record from one system represents the same platform/package/license as in another system

      again, it's all about identifiers and sameness. Linked Data does not solve it but encourages it much more than other technology!

    8. Well, it’s a hard problem of domain modeling, harder than it might seem at first glance.

      Isn't library science supposed to solve this problems? What do we actually have library science for?

    9. Well, because the actual world we are modeling is complicated and constantly changing over the decades, it’s unclear how to formally specify this stuff, especially when it’s changing all the time

      that's why catalog records should regularly be updated and revised (which they are not)

    10. most of the records in our local catalog also haven’t been updated since they were added years, decades ago.

      If data is not updated it is not usage data but archived material

    11. Google Books actually has a pretty good API,

      Even good APIs and good data does not help if libraries are incapable making use of it. See https://danelleorange.wordpress.com/2015/12/02/in-which-your-blogger-loses-it-about-the-library-field/

    12. Why do we get from there instead of OCLC? Convenience? Price?  No easy way to figure out how to bulk download all records for a given purchased ebook package from OCLC? Why don’t the vendors cooperate with OCLC enough to have OCLC numbers on their records

      I fear that acquisition of library holdings or licenses is still unconnected to any use cases for their bibliographic data (if there are any at all)

    13. A major linked data campaign may not be the most efficient, cost effective, or quickest way to solve those problems.

      There may be more efficient ways to solve the problems but without campaign it is hard to solve anything. Linked Data gives a reason to actually change something, it can also be used as door opener!

    14. For the past 7+ years, my primary work has involved integrating services and data from disparate systems, vendors, and sources, in the library environment. I have run into many challenges and barriers to my aspired integrations. They often have to do with difficulties in data interoperability/integration; or in the utility of our data, difficulties in getting what I actually need out of data.

      me too, and probably many people involved in library IT

    15. and is considered a successor to Freebase by some

      Wikidata is not based on RDF internally but it can be mapped to RDF which is quite useful: https://query.wikidata.org/

    16. Modeling all our data as individual “triples” makes it easier to merge data from multiple sources

      Wikidata is not based on RDF by purpose but it is mapped to RDF which is quite useful: https://query.wikidata.org/

    17. abandoned in 2010

      So the hype ended somewhere between 2010 and 2012. SWIB conference started in 2009.

    18. can actually make the linked data more difficult to deal with practically

      Only that's the core benefit of Linked Data.

    19. while establishing standard shared URI’s for entities (eg `http://example.org/lccn/79128112`) is basically “authority control”.

      That's why certain kind of libraries (including me) like about Linked Data: it promotes best practice in catalouging.

    20. I call the linked data model an “abstract data model“,

      I'd call it a data structuring language (comparable with other languages such as XML and JSON). Each data structuring languages implies its own data model - in the case of RDF this model is based on graphs.

    21. even before there were computers

      It started with writing in structures such as lists, tables, cards, forms etc.

    22. of how widespread or successful linked data has been in the wider IT world

      it hasn't.

  19. Oct 2015
    1. division criteria


    2. The interchangeability of the terms "vocabulary" and "controlled vocabulary"

      "controlled vocabulary" might be a superclass of "knowledge organization system". All KOS are controlled vocabularies, aren't they?

    3. prototype of the designed knowledge base

      Where is this knowledge base?!

    4. Knowledge Organization System (levels of knowledge organization)

      The image can only be understood with the following explanation.

    5. currently represented via the technology of Linked Open Data (LOD)

      Well, LOD may be the most prominent technology and for good reason but it's just one possible technology among others.

    6. with the objective of making its storing and access possible

      KOS may also be used for other purpose such as learning aid!

    7. its definition varies from author to author

      Wikipedia should give an overview but it is also biased toward article authors. The current article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Organization_Systems is very brief and the article on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_system is mixed with articles about KOS in some languages. See https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6423319 and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3622126 in Wikidata.

    8. DF13P01OVV013 "Knowledge Base for the Subject Area of Knowledge Organization" project
  20. Sep 2015
    1. people now think hypertext means the web

      See Nelson's reply to Tim Berners Lee about crediting him in Weaving the Web.

    2. In 1960 I had a vision of a world-wide system of electronic publishing, anarchic and populist, where anyone could publish anything and anyone could read it.  (So far, sounds like the web.)  But my approach is about literary depth-- including side-by-side intercomparison, annotation, and a unique copyright proposal.  I now call this "deep electronic literature" instead of "hypertext," since people now think hypertext means the web.