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

Re: The 5 stars path

From: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:31:34 -0700
Message-ID: <CAMFz4jibSBirNsZ0J+vZn5bP6vvtO6TExOHALYJu9AXgp39FJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
Cc: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>, DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
Laufer and Bernadette,

I raised an issue relating to this asking the question can we use 5 star as
a metric and not a path? http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/148

Eric S.

On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>
wrote:

> 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 15:32:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 20 March 2015 15:32:02 UTC