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 -- Resolvable URIs based Names
2. Data Representation Format Dexterity -- HTTP + Content Negotiation
which loosens the coupling between model Semantics and Data Representation
3. Platform Agnostic Data Access -- HTTP delivers this well
4. Change Sensitivity -- speaks for itself, hopefully
5. Provenance -- data about the data (metadata) that helps establish
"Who, What, When, Where, and ~ Why" re. curation
6. Mesh Navigability -- inference context enables this ..
This is why I say: look at Data like a cube of sugar. Especially when
trying to fashion Linked Data oriented business models. 1-6 nullify many
of the concerns about data driven business models:
1. Wholesale Imports (crawls) that reconstitute data in a new data space
-- #1 allows you to brand your data, when combined with licensing it
also allows you track conformance (remember, Web Architecture makes the
Web sticky via http logs amongst other things, so entropy is your
friend, ultimately)
2. Attribution -- ditto
3. Data Consumer Identity -- WebID will put an end to API Keys (major
relics) so QoS based on quality factors #2-6 is absolutely plausible.
Kingsley
Thanks
Juan Sequeda
+1-575-SEQ-UEDA
www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com>
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Martin Hepp
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
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
Web successful.
+10000000000
The same is true for the Web of Data. There obviously cannot
be any
restrictions on what people can/should publish (including,
different
opinions on a topic, but also including pure SPAM). As on the
classic Web,
it is a job of the information/data consumer to figure out
which data it
wants to believe and use (definition of information quality =
usefulness of
information, which is a subjective thing).
+10000000000
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 types. But I hope everybody agrees
that the Web is successful because of this tolerance, not because
of the buggy content itself. Quite to the contrary, the Web has
been broadly adopted because of the lots of commonly agreed
high-quality contents.
If you continue to live the linked data landfill style it will
fall back on you, reputation-wise, funding-wise, and career-wise.
Some rules hold in ecosystems of all kinds and sizes.
Best
Martin
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
