Kingsley Idehen
Sun, 21 Mar 2010 11:08:57 -0700
Danny Ayers wrote:
On 20 March 2010 21:18, Kingsley Idehen <kide...@openlinksw.com> wrote:All, I continue to struggle with easy discovery of Government oriented Linked Data (UK and U.S. are examples). Basically, a long time ago, we established some core principles for Linked Open Data published to the Web. The components where broken down as follows: 1. Publish RDF Data Set archive URLs to a well known location -- http://esw.w3.org/DataSetRDFDumps 2. Publish SPARQL Endpoints -- e.g., <http://esw.w3.org/SparqlEndpoints> 3. Publish Linked Data -- an home page or deeply linked URI will do.I suspect (and hope) 1 & 2 are redundant if you have 3.
Yes, if #3 provides pointers to #1 & #2.
>From what I've heard from the w3c eGov list and bits of offlist chat, it's still early days for getting government data out there. There seems to be a lot of momentum, but right now it's directed towards local issues, getting data into a Web-friendly form (I hate to use the term "legacy", but a lot of the time it does seem to apply - the source material is buried in a spreadsheet or even a pdf document). Getting the stuff translated & exposed, linked into the rest of the world (beyond just shared vocabs) will be phase 2 I expect.DBpedia still provides a very nice template for the above.Absolutely. It's worth noting that for the gov depts to maintain credibility, that provenance information should be associated with any data exposed - a minor technical hassle, in most cases likely fulfilled by manual annotation. (see the Open Provenance Model, if I understand being RDFized in data.gov.uk http://openprovenance.org/).
Yes, certainly !
I think this applies to anything that references DBpedia but not created by the core project members. If you recall, there have been a number of DBpedia linksets (see the mailing list archives) from across the LOD community that we've loaded into the DBpedia instance, using distinct graph IRIs etc..A related issue (that Jeni Tennison has raised) is the question of authority over the statements. I believe she has the right idea, that to link gov data into e.g. dbpedia, intermediary graphs are necessary, to ring fence the levels of commitment between the national, centralised expression of "facts" and those other facts we know and love from the social-web world.
I only get demonstrably impatient when the message (easily perceived as a marketing message) gets out of sync with the actual deliverables.Unfortunately, most of the Govt oriented Linked Data projects haven't quite adopted the scheme above thereby making the process of discovering items 1-3 quite tedious.Your impatience is understandable, but from what I can gather, things are progressing...
Linked Data is about LINKs, so whenever there is talk of Linked Data there should be a LINK in place to materialize the value prop. of a given Linked Data Space. The LINK in question should really be a conduit to SPARQL endpoint, Data Set URLs etc., since value prop. imbibers are going to be varied -- naturally.
Suggestions: I think we can tackle this problem by doing the following: 1. Use the moniker Linked Open Govt Data (LOGD) for all Govt. oriented Linked Data projectsWhere? A good idea in principle, but we don't really yet have the material in place to justify a shared e.g. mailing list.
This is just about reference, no different to saying: LOD.
2. Use #hashtag #logd on Twitter and "logd" for tagging on del.cio.us -- one data is on del.icio.us or Twitter, its basically part of LOD via RDFizers etc..That sounds reasonable. Anything that can help human discovery can't hurt machine discovery.
That's basically my point :-) Kingsley
So Far I have: 1. http://delicious.com/kidehen/logd -- del.icio.us taggood-o Cheers, Danny.
-- Regards,Kingsley Idehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehenTwitter/Identi.ca: kidehen