Re: imdb as linked open data?

2008-04-03 Thread Yves Raimond
Hello! I'd just like to point out the following: http://www.omdb.org/movie which has a better licensing, it seems: http://www.omdb.org/content/Copyright Perhaps worth getting in touch with them to see if they can provide some RDF? AFAIK Jen Golbeck used imdb data for Filmtrust [1] (not

Re: imdb as linked open data?

2008-04-03 Thread Hugh Glaser
On 03/04/2008 12:41, Kingsley Idehen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hugh Glaser wrote: ... Hugh Hugh, This is an example of many to come, where LOD needs to pitch the value of Linked Data to Information Publishers :-) I think they will ultimately publish and host their own RDF Linked Data

What are proper URIs for RDF representations of real existing content

2008-04-03 Thread Mark Diggory
I've been working on getting a DSpace instance up with RDF exposed. Its been fairly successful at this point and I can navigate the contents with tools like Tabulator. I want to bring to question my URIs and get advice on the way I'm identifying things... For any one Community,

Re: imdb as linked open data?

2008-04-03 Thread Sergey Chernyshev
Yes, it's exactly the thing I was thinking about - what is the business model (or at least approach that can bring money) for content providers to 1. create data 2. release it under open (or not so open) license so other parties can freely use it 3. and spend money on RDFizing it I

Re: imdb as linked open data?

2008-04-03 Thread Kingsley Idehen
Hugh Glaser wrote: On 03/04/2008 12:41, Kingsley Idehen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hugh Glaser wrote: ... Hugh Hugh, This is an example of many to come, where LOD needs to pitch the value of Linked Data to Information Publishers :-) I think they will ultimately publish

Re: What are proper URIs for RDF representations of real existing content

2008-04-03 Thread Mark Diggory
On Apr 3, 2008, at 6:41 PM, Mark Diggory wrote: On Apr 3, 2008, at 10:42 AM, Richard Cyganiak wrote: Because I feel this is a description of that resource, not a description of a description of the resource. I'd like to be able to say... rdf:RDF ... rdf:Description