We've been twitting new resources for a while now at @ubcnewbooks and I added annotations when the topic came up last time. Until just now the annotation was:
{
subject: "LC subject",
isbn: "ISBN13",
call_number: "(local) call number",
author: "Author",
title: "Title",
alternate_title:"(from MARC 880 if available)",
// And since just now I've added these to closer align with the
recommendations:
type: "book|ebook|music|map|video|...",
year: "20xx",
url: "http://url.of.ebook/if_available";
}
It's hardly MARC, but it's something. One thing I haven't decided is
whether the 'url' should point to the item's catalog record or to the
ebook url, since the catalog url is in the actual tweet.
Rod
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 07:15 -0700, Jay Luker wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I found this thread rather interesting and figured I'd try and revive
> the convo since apparently some things have been happening in the
> twitter annotation space in the past month. I just read on techcrunch
> that testing of the annotation features will commence next week [1].
> Also it appears that an initial schema for a "book" type has been
> defined [2].
>
> Have any code4libbers gotten involved in this beyond just opining on list?
>
> --jay
>
> [1] http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/02/twitter-annotations-testing/
> [2] http://apiwiki.twitter.com/Annotations-Overview#RecommendedTypes
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
