Hello!
Just to jump on the last thread, something has been bugging me lately.
Please don't take the following as a rant against technologies such as
voiD, Semantic Sitemaps, etc., these are extremely useful piece of
technologies - my rant is more about the order of our priorities, and
about the
and the Linked Data flu (was:
Can we lower
the LD entry cost please (part 1)?)
Resent-From: Linked Data community public-lod@w3.org
Resent-Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 11:34:24 +
Hi Yves,
On Feb 9, 2009, at 11:40 AM, Yves Raimond wrote:
the beginning! If someone really wants a smallish search engine
pneumonia and the Linked Data flu (was: Can
we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?)
This is a point I have always brought up... it is hard! It is hard to
produce LD and hard to consume LD. No sane person will want to do maintain
this. Yves just explained everything he goes through
It seems to me that the data in an rdbms is often structured in ways
that are designed to be efficient for the rdbms to manage rather
than in ways that make sense externally. Levels of normalisation are
the main thing I'm thinking of. LD is most widely useful at 5th
Normal Form, but then
hmmm... when I posted You'll have to invest a lot of time to use the
right vocabularies (a) and right (external) URIs (b) to expose the
right things (c). earlier...
what about (c)?
I think there are publishers like the BBC, who have clear incentives -
their business is to record things
OK.
Let me be a bit optimistic here :-)
And plug my technology :-)
Despite my frustrations, I did manage to do some linking.
I had a quick go at the languages, and the fruits of those labours can be
found in the CRS of the courseware.rkbexplorer.com KB.
This means that for example users of
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:03 AM, Kurt J kur...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi List,
IMHO, the discussion about incentives v. costs is really interesting.
Publishing linked data is getting easier as better tools become
available. As a relative new comer, i can already get a sense about
this. But
Subject: Semantic Web pneumonia and the Linked Data flu (was: Can we lower the
LD entry cost please (part 1)?)
To: public-lod@w3.org public-lod@w3.org
Date: Monday, February 9, 2009, 10:40 AM
Hello!
Just to jump on the last thread, something has been bugging me lately.
Please don't take
Berlin
www.georgikobilarov.com
-Original Message-
From: public-lod-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-lod-requ...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Andraz Tori
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 4:02 PM
To: Hugh Glaser
Cc: public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Re: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1
]
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 4:29 PM
To: Georgi Kobilarov; Andraz Tori; Hugh Glaser
Cc: Linked Data community
Subject: Re: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?
Georgi, All,
If we don't reward the Linked Data publishers who provide clean data
and
penalize those who
...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Andraz Tori
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 4:02 PM
To: Hugh Glaser
Cc: public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Re: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?
Hi Hugh,
I think you are mixing two completely different goals.
Why can't one set of people
On 2/8/09 10:50 AM, Andraz Tori wrote:
On the other hand, the major problem of semantic web is lack of
_incentives_ for publishers to publish data in clean semantic form.
I am working on one of the initiatives to change that and it will
hopefully see light of the day soon.
Andraz,
Hausenblas michael.hausenb...@deri.org, Andraz Tori
and...@zemanta.com, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Cc: Linked Data community public-lod@w3.org
Subject: RE: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?
Hi Michael,
Looking forward to find and use a respective voiD description
Hello!
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Hugh Glaser h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote:
My proposal:
*We should not permit any site to be a member of the Linked Data cloud if it
does not provide a simple way of finding URIs from natural language
identifiers.*
Rationale:
One aspect of our Linking
Hi Hugh,
The OpenCyc ontology has English strings for its terms, and a search
facility at
http://sw.opencyc.org/
Sorry, no Tim Berners-Lee (yet), but if you type Tim it will
auto-complete and show you Tim Duncan and the other Tims we have.
We also have links to DBpedia for many of our terms.
--
Georgi Kobilarov
Freie Universität Berlin
www.georgikobilarov.com
-Original Message-
From: public-lod-requ...@w3.org [mailto:public-lod-requ...@w3.org] On
Behalf Of Hugh Glaser
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 2:24 PM
To: public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Can we lower the LD entry
...@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 13:23:44 +
To: Linked Data community public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?
Resent-From: Linked Data community public-lod@w3.org
Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 13:24:39 +
My proposal:
*We should not permit any
.org
Subject: DBpedia Lookup RE: Can we lower the LD entry cost please
(part
1)?
dbpedia: wanted Tim again. After clicking on a few web pages, none
of
which
seemed to provide a search facility, I resorted to my usual method:-
look it
up in wikipedia and then hack the URI and hope
Data community public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?
Resent-From: Linked Data community public-lod@w3.org
Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 13:24:39 +
My proposal:
*We should not permit any site to be a member of the Linked Data cloud if
it
does
RE: Can we lower the LD entry cost please (part 1)?
Resent-From: Linked Data community public-lod@w3.org
Resent-Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 15:19:30 +
dbpedia: wanted Tim again. After clicking on a few web pages, none of
which
seemed to provide a search facility, I resorted to my usual method
On 2/7/09 10:18 AM, Georgi Kobilarov wrote:
oh, it was my laziness that kept me from announcing it publically yet,
but since Hugh is complaining about the lack of URI search functionality
in DBpedia, here it is:
http://lookup.dbpedia.org
and web service
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 8:15 AM, David Baxter retx...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Hugh,
The OpenCyc ontology has English strings for its terms, and a search
facility at
http://sw.opencyc.org/
Sorry, no Tim Berners-Lee (yet), but if you type Tim it will
auto-complete and show you Tim Duncan and
Many thanks for all the stimulating response to brighten up this dreary
Saturday and help me to avoid the things I really have to do.
A digest of some of my further responses (so it is easy to ignore me all at
once if you want!):
On 07/02/2009 15:02, Andraz Tori and...@zemanta.com wrote:
Hi
Hello!
Sorry, I just cannot accept that a SPARQL endpoint is th esort of thing that
we should be expecting new casual users to try to use, even with a query
builder.
You made the point about linkage systems - I was answering to that.
I am not suggesting casual users should write SPARQL
Yves,
just on the side, yes there is not much dbtune in sindice. just a few
http://sindice.com/search?q=dbtuneqt=term
if you have an RDF dump of the site or of part of it and you express
it in a semantic sitemap you would be indexed full in very short time
. Otherwise we should have the ne
On 07/02/2009 19:57, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
Sorry, I just cannot accept that a SPARQL endpoint is th esort of thing that
we should be expecting new casual users to try to use, even with a query
builder.
You made the point about linkage systems - I was answering
26 matches
Mail list logo
