Comments on: Implementation challenges and barriers to adoption

By: Johan Oomen

Johan Oomen — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:35:20 +0000

“Technological changes have taken place so quickly that many in library positions today began their careers long before the World Wide Web was a reality, and these workers may not fully understand the import of these changes.” => what an extremely bold statement.

By: Johan Oomen

Johan Oomen — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:34:43 +0000

“cooperative agreements ” between whom?

By: Johan Oomen

Johan Oomen — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 13:34:26 +0000

Please elaborate on the “particularly libraries” statement.

Also “have greatly hindered libraries ability to create competitive information services.” => add a reference

By: Adrian

Adrian — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 12:22:20 +0000

The heading seems to assume that linked data necessarily means open data. This isn’t the case as you can publish data as RDF without an open license or without any license at all (as several organisations do) or as you can even do linked data in an intranet. Also, you can publish linkable data and let it be linked to and then establish a paywall around the data.

In general, the report lacks a clarification regarding the terms “Linked Data” vs. “Open Data”.

I suggest adding a paragraph or section to the report which clarifies the two terms, “open data” being about open access, open standards and open licenses in the first place and “linked data” being about a specific set of standards or best practices for publishing data on the web recommended by the W3C. An important aspect of open data is legal compatibility of data while linked data deals with technical compatibility of data.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 12:08:32 +0000

I think this paragraph has to be fundamentally changed or even omitted. It implicitely argues that individual records are copyrighted. Much speaks for individual records aren’t copyrighted at all and that, thus, nobody owns any rights on them. At least in Europe you only have the related database right on collections of records.

I believe the legal status of records is quite clear (not copyrighted), at most this is a grey area. The report shouldn’t speak in favour of the view that individual records are copyrightable.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:28:16 +0000

“the need to think of broader bibliographic data exchange (e.g. with publishers) is new and not universally accepted”

I suggest adding scholars to the brackets as an example of communities with which data exchange and interlinking would be very fruitful for academic libraries.

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:24:46 +0000

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 10:23:51 +0000

By: karencoyle

karencoyle — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:18:41 +0000

Jennifer, can you give examples? I’m not sure what you’re referring to.

By: karencoyle

karencoyle — Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:16:40 +0000

For non-profits and other service organizations, ROI includes intangible benefits like “making society better.” The non-profit management literature addresses this. So we should assume ROI to include those “less tanglibles.”