Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

icommons-pd - [Icommons-pd] Hello, first tasks

icommons-pd AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cooperation on public domain projects

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Tom Chance <tom AT acrewoods.net>
  • To: icommons-pd AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [Icommons-pd] Hello, first tasks
  • Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 18:09:15 +0100

Ahoy,

Thanks to everyone who has subscribed so far. I feel like I should kick a
conversation off, so here goes.


First of all, I started a wiki page which contains a list of some public
domain projects. Could you all please add any that are missing:
http://wiki.icommons.org/index.php/Public_Domain

Over the next few months it would be nice to expand that page so it becomes a
good resource. Maybe people could also leave requests for information.


Second, we're all aware (and excited to know) that there are lots of projects
going on relating to the public domain. Most are trying to digitise chunks of
cultural works that are out of copyright, whilst others are trying to produce
registries of all such works in their country. Some are planning to do
both :-)

But why are we all working in isolation? It would make a lot of sense to
share
data, tools and so on. Rufus Pollock put together a proposal for a shared
metadata database, which I will reproduce in full here. Comments would be
wonderful!

Original:
http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/pdb-discuss/2006-July/000078.html


= Metadata Database =

A metadata database for cultural works (books/recordings/films etc) is a
prerequisite for all kinds of activities from a database of public
domain works to a mass digitization project such as Google Print.

At base this database models two types of objects (more if we include
items such as Recordings and Films):

Artist
* name
* dob
* date of death
* ...
Work
* title
* creators (link to artists)
* date created
* ...
[Recording]
...

== Desirable properties of such a metadata DB ==

1. **Persistent** identifiers for Artists and Works. That way one can
have a single central registry which can then be *reused* by other
projects via the identifiers (e.g. a public domain project and orphan
work project could both reuse the same metadata db).

2. Data should be 'open' (see http://www.okfn.org/okd/) so that anyone
can reuse and redistribute it (without this it will be much harder for
different projects to agree to collaborate on a *central* database). One
of the main benefits of the data being open is that it makes it easy for
someone to 'branch' the database -- i.e. create their own version under
their control. This might be useful if an organization had specific
needs, for example needing to ensure the data was ultra reliable.

3. Versioned and community editable: this way one can enlist a community
of volunteers to improve and add to the database. At the same time
versioning means that contributions can be checked, audited and reverted.

== Collaboration ==

How could two different organizations collaborate with respect to such a
database. There are several ways:

1. Share data. Both organizations could contribute their data into an
open central repository (maintained by either of them or even by a third
party)

2. Collaborate in developing the database itself (database structure,
maintenance etc)

3. Collaborate on developing tools to utilize and interface with the
database. For example one would like to have a web front end to the
database by which members of the general community could edit and add
information

With open data only the first option is essential to the collaboration
process: it is entirely possible for two groups to share data but to
build their own infrastructure and interfaces to that data.


Regards,
Tom

--
The task of critique is not to denounce the ideals, but to show their
transformation into ideologies, and to challenge the ideology in the
name of the betrayed ideal (Fromm – Beyond The Chains Of Illusion)



  • [Icommons-pd] Hello, first tasks, Tom Chance, 07/20/2006

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page