Thanks, Tim. That's an important perspective. I wonder if it will be easier to be a useful open bibliographic system after the hoped-for death of the MARC record format.[1][2] (Yes, I know -- too slow, too far down the road...) I think that MARC posed too much of a challenge for OL to deal with. If library data could be managed as something closer to entities and key/value pairs then serving the data out becomes more manageable.
I think it would be a good idea to keep this possibility open -- not only in relation to libraries but to be helpful to anyone compiling bibliographies or making other use of bibliographic data. kc [1] http://loc.gov/marc/ [2] http://bibframe.org On 3/6/13 1:57 PM, Tim Spalding wrote: > FWIW, as someone at the first meeting, I thought "one webpage for > every book" a bad road to go down. Lots of other people can do that. > It's not that interesting. > > I was hoping that it could be a large open repository of book data, > for people and especially for libraries. For starters, I hoped it > would replace OCLC, the powerful, expensive library data monopoly > libraries suffer under. Replace it and improve on it. OL missed that > chance. It got huge amounts of data from libraries–and then gave > nothing back. Sure, there were APIs, but it didn't play at all with > standard library protocols and formats. So libraries gave a lot, got > nothing back and largely forgot about it. > > Many of you have heard of SkyRiver, a company that tried to take OCLC. > They ended up suing OCLC for antitrust violations, particularly for > using their unique power to force companies not to play with > competitors. Earlier this week SkyRiver folded, the rump getting > combined into another company, and dropped its suit. > > It would be nice to see OL take that up—to make bibliographic freedom > a key agenda. I know Aaron was inspired by that goal. But I don't know > where it went. > > Sorry for the harshness. > > Tim > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Tom Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I see some possible different nuances in goals: worldwide catalogue of all >>> books vs. catalogue for e-books hosted by IA, API access vs. web access, >>> only open data vs. more data regardless of openness. >> >> For my part, the goal is to retain the mission of "One webpage for every >> book." That's what I'm saddened to see fading away. >> >> - Tom >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Ben Companjen <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Not to disregard your other (good) points, but perhaps it's a good >>> idea to take a small step back to see "what is OL's goal again?" >>> This might help set priorities for the more technical issues. >>> >>> I don't think there is a need to go in a completely different >>> direction, but I do believe different people may be here for different >>> reasons. For example, I see some possible different nuances in goals: >>> worldwide catalogue of all books vs. catalogue for e-books hosted by >>> IA, API access vs. web access, only open data vs. more data regardless >>> of openness. >>> >>> Using the wiki pages on OpenLibrary.org makes sense (as long as noone >>> at IA thinks it enough and pulls the plug, which is unlikely), >>> together with this and other OL mailinglists. >>> >>> Ben >>> >>> On 6 March 2013 10:30, John Rigdon <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I have spent some time perusing the bios of the various people working >>>> with Internet Archive and viewing some presentations done by George and >>>> others. I think a working group - call it a comittee if you must - as >>>> suggested earlier is needed to begin setting some objectives and >>>> responding to interested users. >>>> >>>> As I see it now we need to address three areas: >>>> >>>> 1. What technical issues need to be addressed for OL. >>>> 2. How can we best organize for cleaning and extending the OL data >>>> 3. Assigning and encouraging volunteers to address projects >>>> >>>> What do we need to do to get a wiki or some other platform set up? I >>>> can >>>> do so on one of my domains, but if we can get the setup or access here >>>> on >>>> OL or Internet Archive I think it will be best. I think a first step >>>> needs to be a working of the existing help pages / user documentation to >>>> make it more usable / accessible for non-techies. While I have >>>> extensive >>>> experience in the web and programming, I have found it quite tedious to >>>> navigate and sort through what is currently there. >>>> >>>> John Rigdon >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Ol-tech mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech >>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to >>>> [email protected] >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Ol-tech mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to >>> [email protected] >> >> >> >> >> -- >> -Tom Johnson >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ol-tech mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to >> [email protected] >> > > > -- Karen Coyle [email protected] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet _______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
