[Crm-sig] Call for Comments

Regine Stein r.stein at fotomarburg.de
Mon May 30 23:48:11 EEST 2011


I can't see a clear notion on "what the term is now", also from other's 
Why ignoring serious sensibilities in the museum community - we are 
aiming at their contribution, aren't we?


Am 30.05.2011 21:07, schrieb martin:
> Dear Max, Regine, yes, I support the latter statement. The term is Linked Open Data
> now, and the Recommendation itself is only about the URIs for the material object, not about what
> and how much content should be revealed, not even about linking. Therefore I prefer to
> stay with the term as is.
> Best,
> Martin
> On 5/30/2011 10:32 AM, Maximilian Schich wrote:
>> Hi Regine and all,
>> In principle, I think, we can all imagine Linked Data that is non-open -
>> and in house museum inventory databases might be so very likely. But the
>> whole point about publishing identifier URIs for museum objects is that
>> they are available for everybody to cite. So indeed in our case the data
>> should be Linked Open Data.
>> Also - notwithstanding my high regard of TBL - just because a concept
>> was introduced by him does not make it more letigimate, just as building
>> reconstructions do not become more realistic if we can attribute them to
>> Andrea Palladio.
>> Best, Max
>> Dr. Maximilian Schich
>> http://www.schich.info
>> http://artshumanities.netsci2011.net
>> Am 29.05.11 18:13, schrieb Regine Stein:
>>> Dear Martin, dear all,
>>> Apologies for the very late comment (however just in time for the
>>> deadline May 30th ;-))
>>> I have one simple recommendation: Please replace "Linked Open Data" by
>>> "Linked Data" throughout the whole documents (and URL).
>>> First because Linked Data is the original term as it was invented by TBL
>>> if I'm not mistaken.
>>> Second because there is a serious debate ongoing on what "Open" means in
>>> Linked Open Data.
>>> E.g. according to the current view in Europeana office it means that all
>>> data to be published as LOD has to be public domain whereas many
>>> representatives of Europeana museum projects do question this requirement.
>>> Though this might appear to be a Europeana specific discussion I think
>>> there is no point for CIDOC to potentially cause confusion about the issue.
>>> Best wishes
>>> Regine
>>> Am 21.03.2011 17:02, schrieb martin:
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> Your comments on http://www.cidoc-crm.org/URIs_and_Linked_Open_Data.html
>>>> will be most welcome!
>>>> Best,
>>>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> Crm-sig mailing list
>> Crm-sig at ics.forth.gr
>> http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list