ruthbrarian’s avatarruthbrarian’s Twitter Archive—№ 2,731

  1. Gonna reup my post "Linked data is made of systems" as a response to a question on how to train people to implement linked data: bit.ly/2YAytrH What does implement mean?
    1. …in reply to @ruthbrarian
      This is 1000% not an attack on the person asking the question. I'm questioning the language of linked data/BIBFRAME/etc.
      1. …in reply to @ruthbrarian
        I contend you can't implement linked data until you have methods/systems to generate & store it, to query it, and to link it elsewhere. At best you have an extended database. If you're lucky, maybe someone else like Google is querying/parsing it.
        1. …in reply to @ruthbrarian
          If I wanted to teach people how to "implement EAD" on the other hand, we could build a working system with an XML/text editor, an XML database (ideally w/querying), and an XSL transformation. We could create it, make it searchable, and display it as HTML pages online. Not bad.
          1. …in reply to @ruthbrarian
            is that a "good" EAD implementation? /enormous shrug is doing it by hand a sustainable practice? I don't think so but I also know people who DO it. And manage. It fit their budget needs & they had sufficient tech help to put that simple system up. It updates DAILY.
            1. …in reply to @ruthbrarian
              cobbling together a triplestore/SPARQL endpoint/using vocabs & ontologies which might be reshared (not BIBFRAME)--and that's not even getting into real linking/interlinked/etc. data -- that kind of stuff is much harder. And
              1. …in reply to @ruthbrarian
                And yeah. anyway. We hear something's important but we have no systems in which to do it and that's just an enormously tough ask on people's patience/FOMO/fatigue