[Crm-sig] Call for Comments

Reinhard Foertsch foertsch at uni-koeln.de
Tue May 31 00:05:14 EEST 2011


Hi *,

I could understand it if the term and the URIs are being kept apart. It could help the discussion in steering free from questions like how non-contributions can be made up as contributions.

Reinhard


Am 30.05.2011 um 22:48 schrieb Regine Stein:

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