<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"	> <channel><title>Comments on: Why Fedora?  Because You Don&#8217;t Need Fedora</title> <atom:link href="http://dltj.org/article/why-fedora-because-you-dont-need-fedora/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://dltj.org/article/why-fedora-because-you-dont-need-fedora/</link> <description>We&#039;re Disrupted, We&#039;re Librarians, and We&#039;re Not Going to Take It Anymore</description> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:48:39 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: Fedora, Objects, Datastreams, Filesystems, and a Correction in Disruptive Library Technology Jester</title><link>http://dltj.org/article/why-fedora-because-you-dont-need-fedora/comment-page-1/#comment-77</link> <dc:creator>Fedora, Objects, Datastreams, Filesystems, and a Correction in Disruptive Library Technology Jester</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 14 May 2006 21:02:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dltj.org/2006/04/why-fedora-because-you-dont-need-fedora/#comment-77</guid> <description>[...] In an earlier post, I extolled the virtues of Fedora as an ideal candidate for digital preservation because &#8220;[a]ll of the metadata (descriptive, preservation, and relationship to other objects) and managed datastreams that make up a digital object are &#8217;serialized&#8217; to a single XML file on a file system.&#8221; Well, as I found out last week, it isn&#8217;t quite that straight forward. &#182; [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In an earlier post, I extolled the virtues of Fedora as an ideal candidate for digital preservation because &#8220;[a]ll of the metadata (descriptive, preservation, and relationship to other objects) and managed datastreams that make up a digital object are &#8217;serialized&#8217; to a single XML file on a file system.&#8221; Well, as I found out last week, it isn&#8217;t quite that straight forward. &#182; [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: τεχνοσοφια &#187; The Jester&#8217;s Case for Fedora</title><link>http://dltj.org/article/why-fedora-because-you-dont-need-fedora/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link> <dc:creator>τεχνοσοφια &#187; The Jester&#8217;s Case for Fedora</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 02 May 2006 21:54:13 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://dltj.org/2006/04/why-fedora-because-you-dont-need-fedora/#comment-49</guid> <description>[...] An advantage of using the Fedora system, as outlined in Why Fedora? Because You Don&#8217;t Need Fedora, is that due to modular design and adherence to more or less open standards, one is not necessarily wedded to Fedora for the foreseeable future.  Items in a Fedora repository are serialized as XML objects, either in the Fedora-METS or FOXML format.  While some of this information is copied into a relational database system and an RDF triplestore for speed and convenience, it is all intact within the serialized XML objects which reside in a predictable directory hierarchy on the local filesystem.  There are at least two advantages to this design: [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] An advantage of using the Fedora system, as outlined in Why Fedora? Because You Don&#8217;t Need Fedora, is that due to modular design and adherence to more or less open standards, one is not necessarily wedded to Fedora for the foreseeable future.  Items in a Fedora repository are serialized as XML objects, either in the Fedora-METS or FOXML format.  While some of this information is copied into a relational database system and an RDF triplestore for speed and convenience, it is all intact within the serialized XML objects which reside in a predictable directory hierarchy on the local filesystem.  There are at least two advantages to this design: [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Served from: dltj.org @ 2012-02-11 17:55:03 by W3 Total Cache -->
