I usually dislike to comment on such discussions, as I don't find them
particularly productive, but 1) since the number of people pointing me to this
thread is growing, 2) it contains some wrong statements, and 3) I feel that
this thread has been hijacked from a topic that I consider
On Oct 21, 2010, at 23:43, Denny Vrandecic wrote:
Second, although it is claimed that Linked Open Numbers are by design and
known to everybody in the core community, not data but noise, being one of
the co-designers of the system I have to disagree. It is noise by design.
Even though I
Hugh,
I'm also not a cURL specialist, but I assume the problem is the # in our
GUID. Unfortunately, due to historical reasons, we have the hash sign in
there and it is a real part of the GUID, not a fragment identifier. You
would have to url-encode our GUID or replace # with %23 manually in order
Hi Alex, Hugh,
You can use our API to query the db using a DBpedia (or Freebase etc.)
identifier. Here an example (for Barack Obama):
http://news.ontos.com/api/ontology?query={get:attrents,offset:0,limit
:30,typeFilter:http://www.ontosearch.com/2008/02/ontosminer-ns/domain/co
Hi Denny,
thank you for your smart and insightful comments.
I also find it a shame, that this thread has been hijacked, especially
since the
original topic was so interesting. The original email by Anja was not
about the
LOD cloud, but rather about -- as the title of the thread still suggests
The Web of documents is an open system built on people agreeing on
standards
and best practices.
Open system means in this context that everybody can publish content
and
that there are no restrictions on the quality of the content.
This is in my opinion one of the central facts that made the
Hi Martin,
The fact that there is obviously a lot of low quality data on the
current Web should not encourage us to publish masses of low-quality
data and then celebrate ourselves for having achieved a lot. The
current Web tolerates buggy markup, broken links, and questionable
content of all
Martin and all,
Can somebody point me to papers or maybe give their definition of low
quality data when it comes to LOD. What is the criteria for data to be
considered low quality.
Thanks
Juan Sequeda
+1-575-SEQ-UEDA
www.juansequeda.com
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Martin Hepp
Hi,
On 22 October 2010 15:47, Juan Sequeda juanfeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Martin and all,
Can somebody point me to papers or maybe give their definition of low quality
data when it comes to LOD. What is the criteria
for data to be considered low quality.
I asked this in the context of
Hi Juan,
Martin and all,
Can somebody point me to papers or maybe give their definition of low
quality data when it comes to LOD. What is the criteria for data to be
considered low quality.
An overview about the literature on data quality can be found in my PhD,
including the
Hi,
The LOD cloud analysis [1] is a really great piece of work. I wanted
to pick up on one aspect of the analysis for further discussion:
whether data is published by the data owner or a third-party.
It seems to me that there are broadly three categories into which a
dataset might fall:
*
Hi,
On 22 October 2010 09:35, Chris Bizer ch...@bizer.de wrote:
Anja has pointed to a wealth of openly
available numbers (no pun intended), that have not been discussed at all.
For
example, only 7.5% of the data source provide a mapping of proprietary
vocabulary terms to other vocabulary
Hi,
The announcement of that the Guardian has begun cataloguing other
identifiers (e.g. ISBN, Musicbrainz) within its API [1] is a nice
illustration that the importance of cross-linking between datasets is
starting to become more generally accepted. Setting aside the debate
about what constitutes
I happen to agree with Martin here.
My concern is that the naïveté of most of the research in LOD creates the
illusion that data integration is an easily solvable problem -- while it is
well known that it is the most important open problem in the database community
(30+ years of research) where
On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:05 AM, KangHao Lu (Kenny) wrote:
Hello Martin,
I don't think my argument would be very logical, but we can't wait for rule
engines to discuss this.
Note, however, the majority of the Web vocabularies use the same URI for the
entity name reference and the
On 10/22/10 10:47 AM, Juan Sequeda wrote:
Martin and all,
Can somebody point me to papers or maybe give their definition of low
quality data when it comes to LOD. What is the criteria for data to be
considered low quality.
My Subjective Data Quality Factors:
1. Unambiguous Names --
On 10/22/10 11:47 AM, Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
The announcement of that the Guardian has begun cataloguing other
identifiers (e.g. ISBN, Musicbrainz) within its API [1] is a nice
illustration that the importance of cross-linking between datasets is
starting to become more generally accepted.
On 10/21/10 11:56 PM, Martin Hepp wrote:
Hi all:
I think that Enrico really made two very important points:
1. The LOD bubbles diagram has very high visibility inside and outside
of the community (up to the point that broad audiences believe the
diagram would define relevance or quality).
Hi All,
Currently nearly all the web of linked data is blocked from access via
client side scripts (javascript) due to CORS [1] being implemented in
the major browsers.
Whilst this is important for all data, there are many of you reading
this who have it in your power to expose huge chunks
On 23 October 2010 01:04, Nathan nat...@webr3.org wrote:
Hi All,
Currently nearly all the web of linked data is blocked from access via
client side scripts (javascript) due to CORS [1] being implemented in
the major browsers.
Whilst this is important for all data, there are many of you
FYI, you should probably be aware.. don't underestimate either, just
take a look at the To: list..
Original Message
Subject: XRD 1.0 currently up for OASIS Standard vote
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 16:25:53 -0700
From: Will Norris w...@willnorris.com
Reply-To:
Hi Nathan,
I implemented this header on http://productdb.org/ (since I had the
code open). Can someone comfirm that it does what's expected (i.e.
allows off-domain requesting of data from productdb.org)
One important thing to note. The PHP snippet you gave was slightly
wrong. The correct form
Hi Ian,
Thanks, I can confirm the change has been successful :)
However, one small note is that the conneg URIs such as
http://productdb.org/gtin/00319980033520 do not expose the header, thus
can't be used.
In order to test yourself, simply do a curl -I request on the resource,
for
23 matches
Mail list logo
