Dear Dominic,
I happened to be in the British Museum yesterday and wondered what you
were up to, then saw this e-mail thread today. I agree that inserting
spurious links in order to fulfil LOD membership criteria is not the way
to proceed. We should think about making reciprocal links between the
British Library data and CLAROS, the World of Art on the Semantic Web
(http://www.clarosnet.org/), which as you know also uses CIDOC-CRM as
the underlying data model for its RDF data. Sebastian Rahtz and Alex
Dutton are probably the best people to contact about that.
Additionally, Martin Doerr may be able to suggest other CIDOC-CRM
datasets to link to.
Kind regards,
David
On 22/05/2012 13:30, Antoine Isaac wrote:
Hi Hugh,
Well Dominic's site is definitely not isolated.
It is very well linked at the ontology level, not instance, however.
I thought his question was timely, since TimBL asked the question at
the panel at LOD2012 as to whether the criteria for inclusion in the
LOD Cloud should be changed.
Yep. As far as I'm concerned, something like a sort of mix between the
LOD cloud and the LOV one (http://labs.mondeca.com/dataset/lov/) would
be really interesting.
But still someone needs to volunteer (as opposed to "being requested")
to do it :-)
Personally I think it is a shame that such a resource should lose a
lot of its visibility because it does not pass the rules.
And I think that putting links in simply to get into the Cloud is not
something that should be encouraged - links should be put in because
they are sensible.
Without visibility, others (such as you!) will be less aware of it
and so not build the links that would actually bring it into the
cloud without Dominic doing anything (as you are now thinking of
doing, since Dominic has made you more aware of it).
Yep. In fact this is part of the reasons why the Library Linked Data
incubator decided to create its own group on The Data Hub
(http://thedatahub.org/group/lld). It helped us to make the datasets
from our community more visible to our community, without making it a
hard pre-requisite to adhere to other communities' requirements.
Some nodes (or group of nodes) at
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/XGR-lld-vocabdataset/#Library_Linked_Data_at_CKAN
are indeed "isolated", in the LOD cloud sense.
Antoine
On 22 May 2012, at 08:42, Antoine Isaac wrote:
Hi Dominic,
I guess that it was with the LOD *cloud* that you had issues. It
looks a bit severe, but I think I understand the motivations: if the
cloud admitted isolated nodes, it would have many of them, and that
would look weird... But of course that does not make your
contribution less interesting. On the contrary, the BL work has
incredible potential for our domain!
Btw let me know if you're interested in links with
data.europeana.eu. We can maybe try something...
Best,
Antoine
PS: I'm copying the email to the LOD-LAM list: I suppose some people
will be interested to continue the discussion with you there!
+1 (best I can do). FWIW, the day buying your way in ceases to be
the certain method of acceptance will be a very good day for all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
--
*From:* Dominic Oldman<[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected]
*Sent:* Monday, May 21, 2012 1:10 PM
*Subject:* Cultural Heritage Data
Hugh suggested that I post this.
We are currently working with other museums aligning our catalogue
data using the CIDOC-CRM ontology. We can now run single federated
queries based on semantic alignment without the need to insert
specific linking triples. When we applied to advertise our site on
the LOD cloud we were turned down because we hadn’t inserted
specific links to other data sources. I realise that I could just
stuff in a few links to Dbpedia to get accepted - but given that we
can harmonise data to a very high degree with another open CRM RDF
data source perhaps we should still be allowed formal acceptance to
the open data community.
Dominic Oldman
*Deputy Head of IS *
*IS Development Manager*
*ResearchSpace Principal Investigator*
*British Museum*
+44 (0)20 73238796
+44 (0)7980 865309
www.BritishMuseum.org
www.ResearchSpace.org
--
Dr David Shotton
Image Bioinformatics Research Group, Department of Zoology, University
of Oxford
South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK. Phone: +44 (0)1865-271193
Skype: davidshotton
