---
martin hepp
www: http://www.heppnetz.de/
email: mh...@computer.org
Hi Egon,
for mashing / reusing data, you do NOT need widely open licenses; what you need
are
1. STANDARDIZED licenses
2. that are identified by a URI so that you can simply evaluate what you are
allowed to do with the data by simple URI comparison.
Proprietary licenses are problematic,
On 3/10/11 2:27 AM, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
Is that bad? For Linked Data to be useful, you need to be able to mix
and share.. Sorry but that's simply not true. For it to be useful *to
you*, perhaps, but (Closed) Linked Data still has massive value as a
technology and not all data should
Hello Martin,
requesting open licenses in the narrow sense basically means requesting the
end of intellectual property on the Web.
Quite the opposite is true. Every license (whether open or not) is
necessarily based on intellectual property rights. So, using open
licenses in fact generally
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/03/11 13:34, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 3/10/11 2:27 AM, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
Is that bad? For Linked Data to be useful, you need to be able to mix
and share.. Sorry but that's simply not true. For it to be useful *to
you*, perhaps,
On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 15:15 +0100, Adrian Pohl wrote:
Hello Martin,
[snip]
And yes, I agree with Christopher that the extreme notion of open is an
ideology, not a technology. Being able to automate the evaluation of what
you can do with the data is a technology. Requesting that all
On 3/10/11 9:47 AM, Damian Steer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/03/11 13:34, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 3/10/11 2:27 AM, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
Is that bad? For Linked Data to be useful, you need to be able to mix
and share.. Sorry but that's simply not true.
Oh dear - I knew I would join eventually.
There is danger in actually defining terms when essentially we are talking
about PR.
This is not dishonest, it is pragmatic.
The 5 stars are great, because they are so simple that any CEO or CTO thinks
they can understand them.
Get me to 3 stars by
On 3/10/11 12:01 PM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
Oh dear - I knew I would join eventually.
There is danger in actually defining terms when essentially we are talking
about PR.
This is not dishonest, it is pragmatic.
The 5 stars are great, because they are so simple that any CEO or CTO thinks
they can
I like the new(ish) addition to http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
on 5-star data. Unfortunately it looks like TimBL typed it with his eyes shut
:-)
Since it's a much read and much referenced document, I'd like to offer the
following version with typos corrected. Perhaps someone
Dear Tim, all:
★ Available on the web (whatever format), but with an open licence
★★Available as machine-readable structured data (e.g. Excel instead of
image scan of a table)
★★★ As (2) plus non-proprietary format (e.g. CSV instead of Excel)
All the above, plus: use open
Can I echo Les Carr's concerns that Excel is a bad example. It's kinda
Open these days. I can read the data in a free perl library, so why
isn't that 3*?
Also, I've created some URIs for the concepts should you want to
describe a dataset conforming to a * ranking;
Maybe Silver Stars and Gold Stars? or just Stars for the linking and
format and Gold for the license?
On 09/03/11 21:03, Martin Hepp wrote:
Dear Tim, all:
★ Available on the web (whatever format), but with an open licence
★★ Available as machine-readable structured data (e.g.
I am fine with that, but we need an approach for promoting linked data that
does not interfere with existing business structures and revenue models.
It's like GPL vs. LPGL - bundling a new perspective with enforcing a new
business culture (as in GPL) means many businesses will rule out accepting
Sorry, didn't mean to start a debate on the contents of the 5-star text,
however useful that may turn out to be :-) I just wanted to fix the obvious
typos!
On 9 Mar 2011, at 21:10, Christopher Gutteridge wrote:
Maybe Silver Stars and Gold Stars? or just Stars for the linking and format
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Martin Hepp
martin.h...@ebusiness-unibw.org wrote:
★ Available on the web (whatever format), but with an open licence
I fear that the open requirement as the entrance gate for the star schema
means that e-commerce data will be excluded.
Most providers of
Hi Christopher,
On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Christopher Gutteridge
c...@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote:
Is that bad? For Linked Data to be useful, you need to be able to mix and
share.. Sorry but that's simply not true. For it to be useful *to you*,
perhaps, but (Closed) Linked Data still has
Is that bad? For Linked Data to be useful, you need to be able to mix
and share.. Sorry but that's simply not true. For it to be useful *to
you*, perhaps, but (Closed) Linked Data still has massive value as a
technology and not all data should or can be fully open!
Linking and Openness are
18 matches
Mail list logo
