W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > March 2014

Re: Data "on" the Web vs Data "in" the Web

From: Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 07:57:46 -0700
To: Christophe Guéret <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>
Cc: Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann@gmail.com>, "hellmatic@gmail.com" <hellmatic@gmail.com>, public-dwbp-wg <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OF58B31ECB.104DA900-ON88257CA6.004FE74F-88257CA6.00523140@us.ibm.com>
Those are good comments.  The graph data market is pretty small today, 
with interest pretty evenly split between RDF and Property Graph.  There 
are some things Graph databases can do, especially in social networking 
examples, that perform much better than traditional databases. 

But no one today is using RDF or Graph Data in any Open Data 
implementation and no one has any plans to do so.  Cities and State 
governments have limited budgets and resources and very limited skills. 

And RDF and Graph are not the only ways to skin this cat...

Does Data Quality need linked data vocabularies to offer value?  Wouldn't 
standardized lineage and certification suffice?  I can see the value of 
graph search for Data Comparability, but well defined metadata would also 
take Open Data to the next level.  If we only recommend RDF and Linked 
Data as Best Practices for Data Publishing and only a small fraction of 
the market can use them, what good have we done?

I want to make sure that the work we do has maximum impact and so far use 
case evidence does not convince me that RDF and Linked Data alone will get 
us there. 


Best Regards,

Steve

Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again"



From:
Christophe Guéret <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>
To:
Steven Adler/Somers/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:
Christophe Gueret <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>, Augusto Herrmann 
<augusto.herrmann@gmail.com>, "hellmatic@gmail.com" <hellmatic@gmail.com>, 
public-dwbp-wg <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Date:
03/25/2014 07:31 AM
Subject:
Re: Data "on" the Web vs Data "in" the Web



Hoi Steve,
Last year Facebook announced its graph search function, choosing the power 
of semantic search without RDF.  What I have learned from this WG 
experience so far is that W3C doesn't really create open standards. It 
creates and enhances and promotes W3C standards. 
I've some difficulties to follow you on that one, aren't W3C standards 
open ? 
The rest of the world often thanks W3C for its ideas and then implements 
those ideas in different ways. 
I thought this was rather common in industry. People copy each other and 
spend time re-branding the same ideas, also probably to go around patents 
while re-using things that are indeed good ideas. E.g. "retina display" 
versus "hd screen", "facetime" VS "hangout" VS "videoconference", "like" 
VS "+1", google's graph VS facebook's graph, etc ... 
Can we, this WG, imagine creating or recommending standards that are 
objective - that describe things to do that anyone can do with or without 
RDF?
We'll see... :)

Regards,
Christophe 

Regards,

Steve

  From: Christophe Guéret [christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl]
  Sent: 03/24/2014 04:01 PM CET
  To: Steven Adler
  Cc: Christophe Gueret <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>; Augusto Herrmann 
<augusto.herrmann@gmail.com>; "hellmatic@gmail.com" <hellmatic@gmail.com>; 
public-dwbp-wg <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>

  Subject: Re: Data "on" the Web vs Data "in" the Web


So now we are creating W3C standards for publishing data as unstructured 
text on websites?
The message of this presentation is actually quite the opposite ;-) 
Instead the idea is to use the Web as platform to host the data. That is, 
instead of publishing datasets as resources use URIs and HTTP to gain 
access to specific (structured !) elements of data sets which can be 
linked and re-used. There has to be a structure and there has to be links 
possibility but this does not mean that RDF is the only model that will 
work out and that RDF/XML is the only way to serialise data.

Is that what's in the charter?  Honestly I have always found the charter 
to be confusing. Maybe it was intended to be machine readable. ;-

:-)

Cheers,
Christophe 

 

Regards,

Steve

  From: Christophe Guéret [christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl]
  Sent: 03/24/2014 03:42 PM CET
  To: Steven Adler
  Cc: Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann@gmail.com>; "hellmatic@gmail.com" 
<hellmatic@gmail.com>; DWBP Public List <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>

  Subject: Re: Data "on" the Web vs Data "in" the Web

Hoi,

I think this (semantic !) discussion around data "on" and "in" can be a 
good way to let people see the difference being putting a link to a 
resource which is a data set dump ("on") and providing some kind of API 
("in") - whatever the technologies of the API are. Lately, I've been using 
that argument to point people to the fact that downloading dumps of data 
in various forms is like doing document sharing prior to the Web. Coming 
them to the conclusion that we should publish our data as Web sites. There 
is a bit of a focus set on SemWeb technologies for that but, really, we 
could think of many other ways to reach the same result. Here are the 
slides, comments are most welcome ;-) : 
http://www.slideshare.net/cgueret/linking-knowledge-spaces

Cheers,
Christophe



On 20 March 2014 15:17, Steven Adler <adler1@us.ibm.com> wrote:
Augusto, 

I am interested in learning about HAL and look forward to this discussion. 
 But I am a bit concerned with the way you phrase these sentences: 

"There should be a way to at first publish open data resources that are 
linked, but without rdf, such as in xml and json. Then, at a later date, 
improve with a descriptive rdf vocabulary and expressed in rdf to become 
linked open data (preferrably, if possible, keeping compatibility with 
clients that implemented reading the previous non-semantic version)." 

To me this reads that non-rdf methods like xml and json are accommodations 
to constituents who "have not yet seen the light of RDF" and I want to 
make sure we are providing best practices standards recommendations to the 
world that exists rather than the "perfect world" we would like someday to 
exist. 

At IBM, we make software that runs on many operating systems.  Of course 
we employ people with preferences for OSX, Linux, Systemz, AIX, Unix, and 
even Windows.  Heck, many ATMS around the world still run on OS/2... 

But because our customers run all of the above we supply them with all of 
the above solutions.   

Can we agree on an "all of the above" approach to DWBP (without suggesting 
that everything someday becomes RDF) too?

Best Regards,

Steve

Motto: "Do First, Think, Do it Again" 


From: 
Augusto Herrmann <augusto.herrmann@gmail.com> 
To: 
DWBP Public List <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org> 
Date: 
03/19/2014 01:16 PM 
Subject: 
Re: Data "on" the Web vs Data "in" the Web





Hi, 

this is a very important point, Ig. My thoughts exactly when I suggested 
we look at the Hypertext Application Language (HAL) proposal [1] in the 
first meeting. It was in fact an invitation for us to think about data 
"in" the web, as in "part of the web itself". We don't necessarily have to 
follow HAL, but should look at is as a source of inspiration. The way 
links are represented in resources in Subbu Allamaraju's RESTful 
Webservices Cookbook [2] is another source of inspiration. 

We should think of standard ways to insert links to other data into many 
common open data formats, such as xml, json and maybe even csv.. Of course 
this linking requirement is satisfied by linked open data and rdf, but 
sometimes organizations have some data and are willing to pubilsh, but 
initially do not have the necessary resources (i.e. people, knowledge) to 
develop vocabularies to describe the data. However, interlinking among 
resources of a dataset, or even linking to resources in other datasets is 
somewhat easier to do. There should be a way to at first publish open data 
resources that are linked, but without rdf, such as in xml and json. Then, 
at a later date, improve with a descriptive rdf vocabulary and expressed 
in rdf to become linked open data (preferrably, if possible, keeping 
compatibility with clients that implemented reading the previous 
non-semantic version). 

Perhaps this could become a use case for the Best Practices document. 

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kelly-json-hal 
[2] http://books.google.com.br/books?id=LDuzpQlVuG4C 

All the best, 
Augusto Herrmann 
Open Data Team - Ministry of Planning - Brazil 


On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:28 AM, Ig Ibert Bittencourt <ig.ibert@gmail.com> 
wrote: 
Hello DWBP, 

I was reading again about the 5 Start for Open Data and I saw this 
affirmation below about 3 starts Web Data [1] that I think would be 
interesting to share with this WG. 

Excellent! The data is not only available via the Web but now everyone can 
use the data easily. On the other hand, it's still data on the Web and not 
data in the Web. 


With regards this affirmation, you can see more details in [2] and [3], 
but not that much. 


[1] http://5stardata.info/ 
[2] http://webofdata.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/data-and-the-web-choices/ 
[3] http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200211/msg01290.html 


Best, 

Ig Ibert Bittencourt 
Professor Adjunto III - Universidade Federal de Alagoas (UFAL) 
Vice-Coordenador da Comissão Especial de Informática na Educação 
Líder do Centro de Excelência em Tecnologias Sociais 
Co-fundador da Startup MeuTutor Soluções Educacionais LTDA. 





-- 
Onderzoeker
+31(0)6 14576494
christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl

Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)
DANS bevordert duurzame toegang tot digitale onderzoeksgegevens. Kijk op 
www.dans.knaw.nl voor meer informatie. DANS is een instituut van KNAW en 
NWO.

Let op, per 1 januari hebben we een nieuw adres: 
DANS | Anna van Saksenlaan 51 | 2593 HW Den Haag | Postbus 93067 | 2509 AB 
Den Haag | +31 70 349 44 50 | info@dans.knaw.nl | www.dans.knaw.nl

Let's build a World Wide Semantic Web!
http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/

e-Humanities Group (KNAW)




-- 
Onderzoeker
+31(0)6 14576494
christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl

Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)
DANS bevordert duurzame toegang tot digitale onderzoeksgegevens. Kijk op 
www.dans.knaw.nl voor meer informatie. DANS is een instituut van KNAW en 
NWO.

Let op, per 1 januari hebben we een nieuw adres: 
DANS | Anna van Saksenlaan 51 | 2593 HW Den Haag | Postbus 93067 | 2509 AB 
Den Haag | +31 70 349 44 50 | info@dans.knaw.nl | www.dans.knaw.nl

Let's build a World Wide Semantic Web!
http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/

e-Humanities Group (KNAW)




-- 
Onderzoeker
+31(0)6 14576494
christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl

Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)
DANS bevordert duurzame toegang tot digitale onderzoeksgegevens. Kijk op 
www.dans.knaw.nl voor meer informatie. DANS is een instituut van KNAW en 
NWO.

Let op, per 1 januari hebben we een nieuw adres: 
DANS | Anna van Saksenlaan 51 | 2593 HW Den Haag | Postbus 93067 | 2509 AB 
Den Haag | +31 70 349 44 50 | info@dans.knaw.nl | www.dans.knaw.nl

Let's build a World Wide Semantic Web!
http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/

e-Humanities Group (KNAW)
Received on Tuesday, 25 March 2014 14:58:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:24:12 UTC