From: Marie-Claire Dangerfield <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2014 10:06:08 +0000
> I agree that we could have expanded many areas, but this would lead to confusion on the data provider side (because we had to take into
> account all 2200 data providers and the extreme range of topics covered), and make the survey unworkable. Coupled with this we thought we
> might tie in the results of the survey with the EDM collection profiles, and as the dbpedia headings are easiest to add in manually
> during the ingestion process this made most sense. Again not to exclude other vocabularies like UNESCO/ MICHEL/PATHS, it was purely
> practical reasoning... We had very successful results (including collection descriptions!) with the test pilot so we hope that will
> continue when the survey is sent out to all providers this week.
IMHO the terminology is a week point of Europeana. As a punching example: I'm afraid we still are not consistent in deciding the type of a
scanned book page: it is text or image ?
And we lost several years without working on an "Europeana Controlled Vocabulary".
Let's (at least now) use the tool developed within AthenaPlus' WP4 (http://www.athenaplus.eu/index.php?en/155/work-packages) in order to
build (collectively) such a thing. Of course "standing on the shoulders of giants" !