I've been having an interesting email exchange with @ivozandhuis, whom I met at the Atlas of digitized newspapers workshop run by @EmilyJLB and @mhbeals a few weeks back.

I think I've finally synthesized my view of #LOD...

Until processes are put in place by large institutions like @BLMetadata and @laBnF to incorporate information from #DH scholars, #LOD is just another way of storing and retrieving information.

"This connectivity is the promise of Linked Open Data," wrote @KatieMcGettigan and I.

Indeed, in an article published in 2018, @KatieMcGettigan and I called for "connectivity between large databases—individual and aggregate library catalogs but also works like the *Bibliography of American Literature*—and boutique databases". https://amst.winter-verlag.de/article/AMST/2018/2/6

I need to provide a way to query my database, minimally by dumping it on @github. I know that.

I still need convincing that I also need to export this MySQL data into RDF to allow another mode of querying.

If libraries tell me they will use my LOD, it's definitely worth it.

I must say that the idea of LOD as simply another way of storing and retrieving data comes to me from @demiankatz of http://dimenovels.org .

He, like me, is an SQL guy, but his collaborator Matt Short is a SPARQL guy, so they produced RDF data from the MySQL database.

Each collaborator queries their shared data in his preferred query language.

Here's a presentation they gave in 2016: it contains the RDF data model they use.

https://2016.code4lib.org/slides/katz_short_code4lib.pdf