Linking HTML pages and data
LODders A simple (possibly dumb) question. Is there a standard mechanism for linking an HTML page to the non-information resource that it describes? For example, in the page http://dbpedia.org/page/Mogwai_(band) I see a number of link elements in the header that point me to alternate representations (rdf, json etc). There's nothing in the header that points me to *http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) * (as far as I can tell) though. There is an about attribute on the body that does so: body onload=init(); about=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_ (band) ... In contrast, if I look at the page for the band on the BBC, i.e. http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/ d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e there seems to be no reference at all to the non-information resource http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/ d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e#artist which is the subject of the page. Any conventions in operation here? Thanks, Sean -- Sean Bechhofer School of Computer Science University of Manchester sean.bechho...@manchester.ac.uk http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
On 16/02/10 12:39, Sean Bechhofer wrote: LODders A simple (possibly dumb) question. Is there a standard mechanism for linking an HTML page to the non-information resource that it describes? In contrast, if I look at the page for the band on the BBC, i.e. http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e there seems to be no reference at all to the non-information resource http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e#artist which is the subject of the page. In this case you have: html:rel alternate - rdf version of page (you can also ask for rdf/xml directly in accept header). RDF version says primary topic is '...#artist' So perhaps the BBC perspective is that the HTML is a lower-fidelity representation of the resource. The dbpedia page also has a rel alternate to an rdf version. In that case, however, the page isn't mentioned. I would add a little RDFa (to beef up the fidelity a touch) and use foaf:primaryTopic. Damian
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
Sean Bechhofer wrote: LODders A simple (possibly dumb) question. Is there a standard mechanism for linking an HTML page to the non-information resource that it describes? For example, in the page http://dbpedia.org/page/Mogwai_(band) I see a number of link elements in the header that point me to alternate representations (rdf, json etc). There's nothing in the header that points me to *http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band)* (as far as I can tell) though. There is an about attribute on the body that does so: body onload=init(); about=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) ... In contrast, if I look at the page for the band on the BBC, i.e. http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e there seems to be no reference at all to the non-information resource http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e#artist which is the subject of the page. Any conventions in operation here? Well the practice (ideally) is to use link/ to expose relationships between Web resources. If you sorta drop the Resource and Non Information Resource dichotomy and think about two things (Docs are things too) then link/ is your very best friend :-) Re. the BBC, and many other publishers of HTML or RDF docs, there is still a tendency to overlook this vital auto-discovery pattern for HTTP user agents. This problem stems from aRDF legacy issues e.g. having triples in RDF docs that don't include any relations with their host container (the doc) or vice versa. Links: 1. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-06 --- RFC covering LINK without any notion of Information Resource that doesn't break anything. Kingsley Thanks, Sean -- Sean Bechhofer School of Computer Science University of Manchester sean.bechho...@manchester.ac.uk http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Entity Search Evaluation @ SEMSEARCH10
(Apologies if you receive multiple copies of this message) Call for PARTICIPATION: Entity Search @ SEMSEARCH10 == Fellow Researcher, for this year's SemSearch workshop to be held at WWW 2010, we are glad to announce a special track for entity search. This is to see where we are and to promote further research on entity retrieval on the semantic data. Please refer to the call below for more details on this matter. As many people were already asking, we would like to make clear that the participation at the entity search evaluation is not necessary for SemSearch10. As usual, we accept any papers that address the SEMSEARCH topics. For news and discussions related to SemSearch and evaluation at SemSearch, please register at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/semsearcheval/. We are looking forward to see you at SemSearch10 in Raleigh, NC! Cheers, Marko Grobelnik, Jožef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia Peter Mika, Yahoo! Research, Barcelona, Spain Thanh Tran Duc, Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe (TH), Germany Haofen Wang, Apex Lab, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China. === Entity Search @ SEMSEARCH10 Third International Semantic Search Workshop SemSearch10 April 26, 2010, Raleigh, NC, USA Homepage: http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/ws/semsearch10#eva Submission deadline for descriptions of Entity Search systems results: April 10th, 2010 (12.00 AM, GMT) === Our ultimate goal is to develop a benchmark, based on which semantic search systems can be compared and analyzed in a systematic fashion. Clearly, semantics can be used for different tasks (document vs. data retrieval) and can be exploited throughout the search process (for more usable query construction, for better matching and ranking, for richer result presentation etc). Hence, such a benchmark shall enable the study of different aspects of semantic search systems. For this workshop, we will initially focus on the aspects of matching and ranking in the semantic data search scenario. In particular, we aim to analyze the effectiveness, efficiency and robustness of those features of semantic search systems, which are ready to be applied to the Web today: the capability to answer queries related to real world entities. The research questions we aim to tackle are: - How well do semantic data search engines perform on the task of Entity Search on the Web? - What are the underlying concepts and techniques that make up the differences? For answering these questions, we provide the following guidelines and support for evaluating entity search systems: --- Queries --- We provide a set of queries that are focused on the task of entity search. These queries represent a sample extracted from the Yahoo Web search query log. Every query is a plain list of keywords. One example of this type is Semantic Search workshop 2010 WWW, which retrieves resources that are representations of or related to the current Semantic Search workshop. More sample queries can be downloaded from this link: [TODO: provide a link]. Access to the evaluation set of queries and thus participation in the evaluation requires the signing of a license agreement. [TODO: provide a link]. To avoid the effect of ad-hoc optimization, we will make the final queries used for the evaluation available to participants only shortly before the submission deadline. --- Data --- We provide a corpus of datasets, which contain entity descriptions in the form of RDF. They represent a sample of Web data crawled from publicly available sources. For this evaluation, we use the Billion Triple Challenge 2009 dataset. Further information and detailed statistics can be found here: http://vmlion25.deri.ie/ The original Billion Triple Challenge 2009 dataset contains blank nodes. We will not deal with blank nodes in this evaluation and thus require participants to encode blank nodes according to the following rule: BNID map to http://example.org/URLEncode(BNID), where BNID is the blank node id. Since the blank node ids in that dataset are unique, this convention is sufficient to map blank nodes to obtain distinct URIs. Instead of encoding the blank nodes using this convention, participants can also download the following version of the Billion Triple Challenge 2009 dataset where blank nodes are have been already converted to URIs: http://km.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/ws/dataset_semsearch2010/000-CONTENTS --- Relevance Judgment --- The search systems produce lists of at most 10 resources ordered by relevance. These results have to be drawn from data in the corpus. Results will be evaluated on the three-point scale (0) Not Relevant, (1) Relevant and (3) Perfect Match. A perfect
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
Hi Sean, On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Sean Bechhofer sean.bechho...@manchester.ac.uk wrote: A simple (possibly dumb) question. Is there a standard mechanism for linking an HTML page to the non-information resource that it describes? Not a dumb question at all--at least for me :-) I've been using the link pattern that Chris Bizer, Richard Cyganiak and Tom Heath documented in How To Publish Linked Data On The Web [1] for discovery of RDF documents that are related to a given HTML document. But you are asking about the relation between a document and the the *thing* being described. I agree with Damien that foaf:primaryTopic seems like it could work, and that one possibility would be to slip a bit of RDFa into the HTML document that asserted: foaf:primaryTopic http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) . I also agree w/ Kingsley that it would be neat to also have a link pattern that non-RDFa folks could use: link rel=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic; href=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) title=Mogwai / Or if mnot's Web Linking RFC is approved it would open the door to using the Link HTTP Header: Link: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band); rel=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic;; title=Mogwai Registering [3] primaryTopic as a link relation type would tighten it up a bit, as well as help advertise the pattern. link rel=primaryTopic href=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) title=Mogwai / At any rate, I'd be interested to hear if other people have other approaches to this. It would be nice to have a little recipe (w3c note?) people could follow when making these sorts of assertions on the web. Assuming one isn't there already of course :-) //Ed PS. the oai-ore folks had a similar use case to link descriptions to the thing being described. They ended up creating a new term oai:describes [4], and documented ways of layering assertions into rdf [5], atom [6] and html [7] documents. I think the vocabulary is probably too specific to aggregations and resource maps to be useful in the general case you are talking about though. PSS. I really just wanted to type Mogwai a bunch of times :-) [1] http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/#discovery [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07 [3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07#section-6.2 [4] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/vocabulary#ore-describes [5] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/rdfxml#remtoaggr [6] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/atom#metadata [7] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/discovery#HTMLLinkElement
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
Ed Summers wrote: Hi Sean, On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Sean Bechhofer sean.bechho...@manchester.ac.uk wrote: A simple (possibly dumb) question. Is there a standard mechanism for linking an HTML page to the non-information resource that it describes? Not a dumb question at all--at least for me :-) I've been using the link pattern that Chris Bizer, Richard Cyganiak and Tom Heath documented in How To Publish Linked Data On The Web [1] for discovery of RDF documents that are related to a given HTML document. But you are asking about the relation between a document and the the *thing* being described. I agree with Damien that foaf:primaryTopic seems like it could work, and that one possibility would be to slip a bit of RDFa into the HTML document that asserted: foaf:primaryTopic http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) . I agree with Damien too, I've nagged enough people about their RDF docs lacking the relation above :-) Ironically, we left the relation out of the RDF docs we generate for DBpedia due to some legacy re-write rules :-( I also agree w/ Kingsley that it would be neat to also have a link pattern that non-RDFa folks could use: link rel=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic; href=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) title=Mogwai / Or if mnot's Web Linking RFC is approved it would open the door to using the Link HTTP Header: Link: http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band); rel=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic;; title=Mogwai We assumed this is a go, and already showcase it via URIBurner and DBpedia data space URIs. Registering [3] primaryTopic as a link relation type would tighten it up a bit, as well as help advertise the pattern. link rel=primaryTopic href=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) title=Mogwai / Yes, but right now rel=foaf:pimarytopic is fine as a custom relation. Conversely, describedby or wrt:describedby is emerging as a cool mechanism for connecting an Entity (via its generic HTTP URI) to the Resource that holds its description. At any rate, I'd be interested to hear if other people have other approaches to this. It would be nice to have a little recipe (w3c note?) people could follow when making these sorts of assertions on the web. Assuming one isn't there already of course :-) We need to make a definitive note about Linked Data auto-discovery patterns, its way overdue. Kingsley //Ed PS. the oai-ore folks had a similar use case to link descriptions to the thing being described. They ended up creating a new term oai:describes [4], and documented ways of layering assertions into rdf [5], atom [6] and html [7] documents. I think the vocabulary is probably too specific to aggregations and resource maps to be useful in the general case you are talking about though. PSS. I really just wanted to type Mogwai a bunch of times :-) [1] http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/#discovery [2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07 [3] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07#section-6.2 [4] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/vocabulary#ore-describes [5] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/rdfxml#remtoaggr [6] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/atom#metadata [7] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/discovery#HTMLLinkElement -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Ed Summers e...@pobox.com wrote: I also agree w/ Kingsley that it would be neat to also have a link pattern that non-RDFa folks could use: link rel=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic; href=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) title=Mogwai / I have been promoting the use of the simpler primarytopic rel value as a pattern for linking HTML pages to the things they are about. I don't think we need to complicate things with pseudo namespaces etc for HTML, just focus on something simple people can copy. You can see it in use on data.gov.uk: http://education.data.gov.uk/doc/school/56 contains: link rel=primarytopic href=http://education.data.gov.uk/id/school/56; / Ian
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
On Feb 16, 2010, at 6:39 AM, Sean Bechhofer wrote: LODders A simple (possibly dumb) question. Is there a standard mechanism for linking an HTML page to the non-information resource that it describes? Um. OK, I have an equally dumb question in response. What does it (what can it possibly) mean to *link* to a non-information resource? I have been understanding the usage of link to mean that a link is a URI which both refers to the thing being linked to (the linkee) and also provides access to it when used in an HTTP GET. But this latter, of course, exactly what is impossible to do when the linkee is a non- information resource, pretty much by definition. Do you mean, a standard mechanism to *refer to* the resource? Because surely that is done simply by *using* the URI which names it. It requires no other 'mechanism'; indeed, I don't think that there possibly could be a mechanism for reference. For example, in the page http://dbpedia.org/page/Mogwai_(band) I see a number of link elements in the header that point me to alternate representations (rdf, json etc). There's nothing in the header that points me to *http://dbpedia.org/resource/ Mogwai_(band)* (as far as I can tell) though. But there is an owl:sameAs which links to http://mpii.de/yago/resource/Mogwai_(band) , which appears to be a use of a URI referring to the non-information resource. Is this an example of the kind of link you are looking for? Pat Hayes There is an about attribute on the body that does so: body onload=init(); about=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) ... In contrast, if I look at the page for the band on the BBC, i.e. http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e there seems to be no reference at all to the non-information resource http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/d700b3f5-45af-4d02-95ed-57d301bda93e#artist which is the subject of the page. Any conventions in operation here? Thanks, Sean -- Sean Bechhofer School of Computer Science University of Manchester sean.bechho...@manchester.ac.uk http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola(850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
Terminology when talking about Linked Data
Hi All, Other than the obvious - Linking Open Data = The name of W3C Community Project - I'm wondering which terminology to use where when talking about (what I'll term Linked Data for now). To me, Linked Data represents the uri uri uri triples; the thing at the core of it, which can be used behind the firewall in a silo with nothing open about it. So if I then term Linked Open Data as Linked Data which has been published properly, then what do I use to refer to the tech-stack and principals as a whole? Will leave it there, Many Regards Nathan
Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data
Hi Nathan, On 17 February 2010 11:18, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote: Hi All, Other than the obvious - Linking Open Data = The name of W3C Community Project - I'm wondering which terminology to use where when talking about (what I'll term Linked Data for now). To me, Linked Data represents the uri uri uri triples; the thing at the core of it, which can be used behind the firewall in a silo with nothing open about it. So if I then term Linked Open Data as Linked Data which has been published properly, then what do I use to refer to the tech-stack and principals as a whole? If it is published internally to an organisation, it may still be Linked Data as the URI's may be resolvable internally by all people who have any need to see the information. It may violate privacy laws for example for the information to be publically available. I wouldn't so much refer to it as properly published, as publically published. What is the context in which you need to make the distinction? Cheers, Peter
Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data
On 17 February 2010 11:32, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote: Peter Ansell wrote: Hi Nathan, On 17 February 2010 11:18, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote: Hi All, Other than the obvious - Linking Open Data = The name of W3C Community Project - I'm wondering which terminology to use where when talking about (what I'll term Linked Data for now). To me, Linked Data represents the uri uri uri triples; the thing at the core of it, which can be used behind the firewall in a silo with nothing open about it. So if I then term Linked Open Data as Linked Data which has been published properly, then what do I use to refer to the tech-stack and principals as a whole? If it is published internally to an organisation, it may still be Linked Data as the URI's may be resolvable internally by all people who have any need to see the information. It may violate privacy laws for example for the information to be publically available. I wouldn't so much refer to it as properly published, as publically published. What is the context in which you need to make the distinction? The context is purely in discussion format; when I'm talking about Linked Data - if I first explain it to mean linked data; then talk about it being made public as linked open data (leaving the private/public what to publish bit out of it) then to what do I refer to the overall tech-stack as? everything that comes with it eg: - Linked Data, RDF, SPARQL, REST, Quad-Stores, REST, Ontologies, OWL2, EAV/CR, FOAF+SSL, HTTP, URIs etc A name for the above as a whole. I try to keep references to Linked Data to mean the part that is purely concerned with the link level interfaces defined by HTTP URIs that resolve to something computer understandable (such as RDF), and which is linked using HTTP URI's to other items where relevant. A definition of Linked Data should ideally not include descriptions about the application level functions (ie, ontologies, FOAF+SSL, SPARQL, Quad/Triple stores) that can be used to support applications that use Linked Data. Is the name (Open?) Semantic Web too much? Many Regards, Nathan ps: I'm aware I wrote REST twice, but for some reason it seemed amusing to leave it in..?! Heh, it is a big part, although technically most current Linked Data is stateless. Cheers, Peter
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
Ian Davis wrote: On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Ed Summers e...@pobox.com wrote: I also agree w/ Kingsley that it would be neat to also have a link pattern that non-RDFa folks could use: link rel=http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopic; href=http://dbpedia.org/resource/Mogwai_(band) title=Mogwai / I have been promoting the use of the simpler primarytopic rel value as a pattern for linking HTML pages to the things they are about. I don't think we need to complicate things with pseudo namespaces etc for HTML, just focus on something simple people can copy. You can see it in use on data.gov.uk: http://education.data.gov.uk/doc/school/56 contains: link rel=primarytopic href=http://education.data.gov.uk/id/school/56; / Ian Ian, I really don't believe we achieve much via: link rel=primarytopic href=http://education.data.gov.uk/id/school/56; / primarytopic isn't an IANA registered type link. If you absolutely need to use foaf then its better to qualify it: link rel=foaf:primarytopic href=http://education.data.gov.uk/id/school/56; / Yes, its a PITA for the average HTML user/developer, but being superficially simpler doesn't make it a valid long term solution. There is a standard in place for custom typed links re. link/. Links: 1. http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml 2. http://www.mnot.net/drafts/draft-nottingham-http-link-header-07.txt -- guide for registering new link relations is in section 4.1 -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data
Mike Bergman wrote: Hi Nathan, Though I assume not universally shared: On 2/16/2010 7:32 PM, Nathan wrote: Peter Ansell wrote: Hi Nathan, On 17 February 2010 11:18, Nathannat...@webr3.org wrote: Hi All, Other than the obvious - Linking Open Data = The name of W3C Community Project - I'm wondering which terminology to use where when talking about (what I'll term Linked Data for now). To me, Linked Data represents theuri uri uri triples; the thing at the core of it, which can be used behind the firewall in a silo with nothing open about it. So if I then term Linked Open Data as Linked Data which has been published properly, then what do I use to refer to the tech-stack and principals as a whole? If it is published internally to an organisation, it may still be Linked Data as the URI's may be resolvable internally by all people who have any need to see the information. It may violate privacy laws for example for the information to be publically available. I wouldn't so much refer to it as properly published, as publically published. Linked data is a set of best practices for publishing and deploying instance and class data using the RDF data model. Two of the best practices are to name the data objects using uniform resource identifiers (URIs), and to expose the data for access via the HTTP protocol. Both of these practices enable the Web to become a distributed database, which also means that Web architectures can also be readily employed. It is not an end in itself, a manifesto for open data, or a substitute for the semantic Web. It is a useful and recommended practice (technique), but nothing more [1]. ;) Mike [1] http://structureddynamics.com/linked_data.html would agree; so far all the responses have been different ways of saying what linked data is; which i agree with wholeheartedly; but further down the in-line comments you'll find the specific problem I'm facing. What is the context in which you need to make the distinction? The context is purely in discussion format; when I'm talking about Linked Data - if I first explain it to mean linked data; then talk about it being made public as linked open data (leaving the private/public what to publish bit out of it) then to what do I refer to the overall tech-stack as? everything that comes with it eg: - Linked Data, RDF, SPARQL, REST, Quad-Stores, REST, Ontologies, OWL2, EAV/CR, FOAF+SSL, HTTP, URIs etc A name for the above as a whole. Two people thus far have said semantic web with some extra words; here's the exact problem I'm facing - linked data is what it is, easily explained. But the Semantic Web (enabling) technologies (which was suggested to me off-list) brings up the following problems. when I refer to semantic web 50% of people think I mean HTML5 or H1-H6 tags, and the other 50% think I mean the stuff returned from open calais. (strangely!) and last time I said linked open data; well here's the response I received: The whole thing about mash-ups/linked data is odd. No one is generating any data. Just reusing/repackaging/rebranding. In hardware terms, they are VARs. And whilst VARs may be cheaper, they aren't often better them OEMs. other responses to the mention of the term linked open data were all along the lines of it lets you get information from lots of places aka web services aka I don't need linked open data and the semantic web technologies because I work internally within a silo which only calls on SOAP web service from the supplier. At no point have I had a term I could use to which people went - ahh what's that, do tell me more Hope that helps explain where I'm coming from, and to clarify further this is for use when talking to general web developers and designers - any mention of this to plumbers and window cleaners I find ends up in them looking at me like I just broke wind (as Billy Connolly would say). Regards thanks thus far! Nathan
Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data
OK, I'll bite ... On 2/16/2010 8:18 PM, Nathan wrote: Mike Bergman wrote: Hi Nathan, Though I assume not universally shared: On 2/16/2010 7:32 PM, Nathan wrote: Peter Ansell wrote: Hi Nathan, On 17 February 2010 11:18, Nathannat...@webr3.org wrote: Hi All, Other than the obvious - Linking Open Data = The name of W3C Community Project - I'm wondering which terminology to use where when talking about (what I'll term Linked Data for now). To me, Linked Data represents theuri uri uri triples; the thing at the core of it, which can be used behind the firewall in a silo with nothing open about it. So if I then term Linked Open Data as Linked Data which has been published properly, then what do I use to refer to the tech-stack and principals as a whole? If it is published internally to an organisation, it may still be Linked Data as the URI's may be resolvable internally by all people who have any need to see the information. It may violate privacy laws for example for the information to be publically available. I wouldn't so much refer to it as properly published, as publically published. Linked data is a set of best practices for publishing and deploying instance and class data using the RDF data model. Two of the best practices are to name the data objects using uniform resource identifiers (URIs), and to expose the data for access via the HTTP protocol. Both of these practices enable the Web to become a distributed database, which also means that Web architectures can also be readily employed. It is not an end in itself, a manifesto for open data, or a substitute for the semantic Web. It is a useful and recommended practice (technique), but nothing more [1]. ;) Mike [1] http://structureddynamics.com/linked_data.html would agree; so far all the responses have been different ways of saying what linked data is; which i agree with wholeheartedly; but further down the in-line comments you'll find the specific problem I'm facing. What is the context in which you need to make the distinction? The context is purely in discussion format; when I'm talking about Linked Data - if I first explain it to mean linked data; then talk about it being made public as linked open data (leaving the private/public what to publish bit out of it) then to what do I refer to the overall tech-stack as? everything that comes with it eg: - Linked Data, RDF, SPARQL, REST, Quad-Stores, REST, Ontologies, OWL2, EAV/CR, FOAF+SSL, HTTP, URIs etc A name for the above as a whole. Two people thus far have said semantic web with some extra words; here's the exact problem I'm facing - linked data is what it is, easily explained. But the Semantic Web (enabling) technologies (which was suggested to me off-list) brings up the following problems. when I refer to semantic web 50% of people think I mean HTML5 or H1-H6 tags, and the other 50% think I mean the stuff returned from open calais. (strangely!) and last time I said linked open data; well here's the response I received: The whole thing about mash-ups/linked data is odd. No one is generating any data. Just reusing/repackaging/rebranding. In hardware terms, they are VARs. And whilst VARs may be cheaper, they aren't often better them OEMs. other responses to the mention of the term linked open data were all along the lines of it lets you get information from lots of places aka web services aka I don't need linked open data and the semantic web technologies because I work internally within a silo which only calls on SOAP web service from the supplier. At no point have I had a term I could use to which people went - ahh what's that, do tell me more Of course, my own view: http://www.mkbergman.com/802/moving-beyond-linked-data/ Mike Hope that helps explain where I'm coming from, and to clarify further this is for use when talking to general web developers and designers - any mention of this to plumbers and window cleaners I find ends up in them looking at me like I just broke wind (as Billy Connolly would say). Regards thanks thus far! Nathan -- __ Michael K. Bergman CEO Structured Dynamics LLC 319.621.5225 skype:michaelkbergman http://structureddynamics.com http://mkbergman.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mkbergman __
Request for Good Ontologies
*Dear* *LOD Afficianods:* * * This message is about an effort you may wish to contribute to, or at least you may be interested in knowing about it. * * *WHAT: **T*he NeOn project http://www.neon-project.org/ is supporting an effort to collect high quality ontologies. I invite you to submit one or more exemplary ontologieshttp://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:WhatIsAnExemplaryOntology to a growing catalog in the Ontology Design Patterns Wikihttp://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org. Identify one or more ontologies that: - you have significant knowledge or experience with, - you regard as an excellent example of a high quality ontology See: What is an Exemplary Ontologyhttp://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:WhatIsAnExemplaryOntology for ideas about this; edit them if you wish. Can you or any of your colleagues think of exemplary ontologies to add to the catalog? *WHY: to make it easy for people to find good ontologies to draw inspiration from and to emulate.* * If you don't have much time, I will make it easier by talking you through it on the phone. I'm UscholdM on Skype.* * * *HOW: Quick Instructions:* 1. Visit *Ontology Design Patterns Wiki*http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/ (http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/) 2. Click the *How to register*http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:Register link at lower left of the page; follow instructions to get a login name and password. ---Or paste: http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:Register into your browser 3. See: *What is an Exemplary Ontology*http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:WhatIsAnExemplaryOntology link for some criteria ---Or paste: h ttp://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:WhatIsAnExemplaryOntologyhttp://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Odp:WhatIsAnExemplaryOntology into your browser 4. Visit *Exemplary Ontology Catalogue*http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Ontology:Main page to make sure the ontology is not already there. ---Or paste: http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Ontology:Main into your browser 5. Click the *Su**bmit a new Exemplary Ontology* button. 6. Fill out a form describing various aspects of the exemplary ontology. Key fields are: 1. *Name *of ontology 2. *Description (Short)* 3. *Purpose *of the ontology 4. *Justification *(why you think this is an exemplary ontology) 5. *URI *of where to find the ontology 6. *References *One or more references to learn more. Submissions should normally be made by champions of the ontology rather than by the developers. This avoids perceived conflict of interest / self-promotion. Thanks very much, Michael ==
Re: Linking HTML pages and data
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Ian Davis li...@iandavis.com wrote: You can see it in use on data.gov.uk: http://education.data.gov.uk/doc/school/56 contains: link rel=primarytopic href=http://education.data.gov.uk/id/school/56; / Wow, thanks Ian. I hadn't noticed this pattern in use at data.gov.uk. It seems like a worthwhile pattern to encourage people to follow, by adding it to the How to Publish Linked Data on the Web [1] ... or elsewhere? //Ed [1] http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/
