Closed jpstroop closed 9 years ago
:+1: but rather than pulling in Sufia's authorities implementation (which pre-dates Questioning Authority), consider using QA. Also have a look at LinkedVocabs or Oargun, which I don't understand fully but which may bring more RDF-iness.
Are authorities in Sufia actual authorities, or just type-ahead?
We harvest the URIs and labels into the DB but users only ever see the labels. So, mostly type-ahead with a local cache of URIs for reverse lookup.
But there's no restriction to only use labels that come from the type-ahead?
Only labels come back from the type-ahead at the moment. It could easily return URIs too.
@mjgiarlo I updated the description to state that we should bring in QA instead, but haven't made a reciprocal issue in sufia-core because I'm not sure how that fits into the plans for sufia.
:ok: I'd love to s/bespoke/QA/ in Sufia but given all that's changing now, I think it's best to backburner that. So :+1: to not pushing that now.
Sufia currently links four vocabularies to four fields, FYI: Geonames to Location, LCSH to Subject, Lexvo to Language, and LC Genres to Keyword/Tag.
Should we look at linking all four vocabularies for Curation Concern as well?
Good question, @njaffer. I defer to @jpstroop and @jcoyne who are both building apps based directly on CC right now.
I don't care about this feature at the moment. Having worked on linked data hydra-head, I think this is probably a bigger piece of work than we want to bite off right now.
What say you, @jpstroop? Do you want this in 0.2 or can it be deferred?
+1 to defer. Closing in favor of a new ticket that can be written when a clearer use case surfaces.
This came from the code shredding halftime review.
_TODO:_ Reciprocal issue in sufia-core: projecthydra-labs/sufia-core#___