W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-wg@w3.org > March 2015

Re: The 5 stars path

From: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:54:12 -0300
Message-ID: <CANx1PzxUbcsB9jo5PRWK5TXmWrno1A+XHSUMUUvn7B76OzmMQw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
Cc: DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Hi Laufer,

Thanks for the message! It is a very useful explanation!

I fully agree with you: "In this dataset publishing I can see the idea of
publishing metadata and using standard vocabularies, but is not a LD
dataset."

IMHO, we can use vocabularies to publish metadata, but we are not doing
linked data, i.e., there are no links between resources.

I also agree that "we should differentiate the idea of a Best Practice of a
non LD dataset of the idea of an implicit Best Practice to go to a LD
dataset, that is what the 5 stars scale says.".

If we have a BP whose implementation proposes the use of the RDF model to
publish data, then we are moving towards the 5 stars. It is important to
note that, publishind data using the RDF model may be just one of the
proposed approaches for implementation, i.e, we may show other ways of
publishing data without using RDF.

Cheers,
Bernadette




2015-03-20 11:32 GMT-03:00 Laufer <laufer@globo.com>:

> Hi all,
>
> I will start my comment using an example:
>
> Someone publish a page where there are links to 2 files:
> a csv file with a dataset;
> a text file that explains the structure of the dataset, in natural
> language (metadata).
>
> In the page there are a lot of metadata provided in natural language, as
> for example, an overview of the dataset, license, organization, version,
> creator, rights, etc...
>
> At the same time, the page has an embedded dcat instance using rdfa where
> there are info about the dataset, the distribution, etc.
>
> What I want to say is that we have here the metadata concept mixed with
> semantic web concepts, and it is a way of publishing data that, if all the
> things are well described, could be very useful to the society.
>
> In this dataset publishing I can see the idea of publishing metadata and
> using standard vocabularies, but is not a LD dataset.
>
> What I was discussing in the last meeting is: will we support in the
> document the idea that the best way to publish is LD. I am not saying that
> I am against or not the idea. I am favorable to LD. But we should
> differentiate the idea of a Best Practice of a non LD dataset of the idea
> of an implicit Best Practice to go to a LD dataset, that is what the 5
> stars scale says.
>
> Maybe is too much care with the words, sorry about this.
>
> Best Regards,
> Laufer
>
> --
> .  .  .  .. .  .
> .        .   . ..
> .     ..       .
>



-- 
Bernadette Farias Lóscio
Centro de Informática
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 14:55:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 20 March 2015 14:55:10 UTC