Please excuse cross-postings. This message is being posted to multiple
lists.
Please join us for the first-ever NYPL Drupal Camp!
In January 2010 the New York Public Library unveiled a soup-to-nuts
re-engineering of its website, moving 15 years of digital sprawl into a
modern, open source
I would definitely fly (drive, bike, walk...) from LA for this if it
didn't conflict with DrupalCon CPH ;(
Cary
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Michelle Misner mmis...@nypl.org wrote:
Please excuse cross-postings. This message is being posted to multiple
lists.
Please join us for the
So in our marc records, we have these 856 links, the meaning of which is
basically some web page related to the entity at hand. You don't
really know the relation, the granularity is not there.
So, fine, data is data, there ought to be some way to model this in
standard XML/RDF/DC/whatever,
Isn't that pretty much what dc:relation is for? From
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#elements-relation
Label: Relation
Definition: A related resource.
Comment:Recommended best practice is to identify the related resource
by means of a string conforming to a formal
Mike:
For sure dc:relation works, and has some subproperties that a bit more
specific, but it's still pretty much a blunt instrument. I know I sound
like a broken record, but RDA has a LOT of relationships to choose
from--these are the WEMI-to-WEMI relationships:
Hi Jonathan,
So in our marc records, we have these 856 links, the meaning of which is
basically some web page related to the entity at hand. You don't
really know the relation, the granularity is not there.
There is some *minimal* indication of the relationship via the second indicator
of
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:00 PM, Doran, Michael D do...@uta.edu wrote:
Of course, subfield $3 values are not any kind of controlled vocabulary, so
it's hard to do much with them programmatically.
A few years ago I analyzed the subfield 3 values in the Library of
Congress data up at the Internet
And one more (tiny, compared to edsu's) data point. You can see the $3
values from over 10,000 records that had 856 fields from an original 1
million records from the UC Berkeley catalog here:
http://roytennant.com/proto/856/?string=%243
in all of it's, uh, gory detail. But I agree that there is
