Discusses the necessity of linked data to inform discovery; the benefits of aggregation and closed data; the issues with rights.

1. Peter
Brantley
Dallas
Internet
Archive
Texas
The
Presidio
01.2012

2. I
have
a
book.

5. It’s
really
a
database
in
a
book.

6. Doesn’t
exist
on
the
web.

7. The
catalog
entry
is
not
useful.

9. It
does
not
even
give
you
a
hint
of
the
awesomeness
of
it.

10. All
bibliographic
data
underperforms
in
this
way,
no
matter
how
we
describe
it.

11. And
it
can’t
do
much
for
discovery.

12. Discovery
is
a
lot
more
than
a
better
index
of
metadata.

15. Discovery
is
metadata,
contextualized
by
user
desire.

16. Which
means:
what’s
relevant
to
me,
right
now,
right
here.

17. One
of
linked
data’s
challenges
is
contributing
to
discovery.

18. Consider:
Small
Demons
(smalldemons.com)

19. Literature
through
freebase
with
zemanta
entity
extraction
and
matching

20. Very
nice
enhanced
browse
capacity
for
ebook
discovery.

21. APIs
could
engender
range
of
new
services.

22. But
…
data
for
recommendations
is
limited
to
known
attributes
and
UGC.

24. Cool
when
it
works;
will
work
better
with
more
aggregation.

25. Lesson:
Information
format
is
often
divorced
from
its
utility

26. and
even
more
importantly
…

27. most
open
culture
search
is
absolutely
ignorant
of
the
context
of
my
desires.

28. remember
“Lincoln”

29. at
the
time
of
writing,
there’s
one
newly
released
and
top-­‐selling
book.

30. chances
are,
at
time
of
writing,
it’s
that
book
that
I
want.

31. Amazon
can
figure
that
out.

32. Because
they
are
selling
a
shitload
of
them.

33. Simple:
increase
relevancy
by
incorporating
bias
toward
most
recent
retrievals.

34. Easy
for
Amazon:
they
have
sales
data.

35. Library
(ebook)
circulation
is
increasingly
meaningless,
or
more
accurately,
unavailable.

36. The
book
is
online.
But
digitally
off-­‐site.

37. Optimizing
discovery
is
hard.

38. Segue:
Consider
relationship
modeling.

39. Mozart’s
Don
Giovanni
and
José
Zorrilla’s
Don
Juan
Tenorio
via
Tirso
de
Molina’s
El
burlador
de
Sevilla

40. per
the
Library
Loon
...
“relationship
modeling
only
need
be
done
once”

41. which
in
real
world
terms
means
centralizing
this
modeling

42. duplicating
the
best
of
Flickr
etc.
–
for
a
LOD
repository

43.
crowd
sourced
resource
modeling

44. Enables
interesting
approaches
to
book
recommending,
browsing
algorithms

45. Linked
data
makes
for
nice
CS
experiments
and
gets
digital
librarians
excited.

46. No
one
thinks
linked
data
is
a
panacea.

47. It’s
a
tool
that
can
help
in
some
contexts.

48. Yet
not
so
much
in
others.

49. I
will
argue
…
The
most
compelling
uses
of
LD
in
repositories
may
be
intra-­‐catalog.

50. Thinking
of
the
catalog
is
a
database,
like
Amazon’s.

51. If
I
just
want
bib
info
(metadata),
go
yonder
to
OCLC
or
Open
Library.

52. If
I
want
to
find
out
what
to
watch
or
read,
I
want
to
go
to
the
largest
aggregation
of
user+meta
data
as
possible.

53. Might
be
Amazon.
(Or
could
be
DPLA
…
).

54. Library
LOD
has
to
be
network
scale,
on
a
single
platform,
to
be
end-­‐user
attractive
(like
Amazon).

55. I
think
that’s
kinda
funny
conundrum.

56. Because
in
a
way,
linked
open
data
is
about
a
web
of
open
data.

57. However,
unless
you
are
in
the
business
of
providing
open
data
there’s
more
utility
in
…

58. structured
data
on
a
restricted
platform
–
linked
closed
data
(so
to
speak)

59. From
a
business
perspective,
I’d
be
a
real
fan
of
linked
closed
data.

60. If
I
offered
cloud
data
services,
I’d
be
happy
to
host
any
useful
linked
open
data.

61. (Because
being
too
open
to
ingest,
too
polygamous,
can
poison
data
stores)

62. As
long
as
I
(a
platform)
could
retain
an
unrestricted
copy
of
your
data.

63. There’s
a
(copyleft)
rights
issue
here
too
…
(e.g.
CC-­‐SA
and
derivatives)

64. LOD
domains
assume
unbounded
sharing

65. But
rights
might
be
quite
granular
or
restricted
downstream

66. Europeana
requires
downstream
commercial
rights
to
encourage
new
enterprise

67. But
LAMS
might
not
possess
those
rights,
restricting
the
size
of
the
data
market.

68. If
we
want
linked
open
data
to
work
well

69. We
need
to
aggregate
and
hold
data
on
a
single
network
platform
to
the
greatest
possible
extent.

70. Because
that
will
drive
use,
and
obtain
intentionality
information.

71. And
that
data
will
help
ultimately
to
contextualize
metadata
with
desire.

72. Therefore
from
the
user
perspective
…

73. I’d
like
to
see
us
build
out
a
common
open
platform
for
LOD.

74. The
most
powerful
opportunity
for
LOD
may
be
in
building
central
repositories.

75.
peter
brantley
director,
bookserver
project
internet
archive
san
francisco
ca
@naypinya
(twitter)