Re: Facebok a leader of _federated_ social networking?

On 7/2/13 6:35 PM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Kingsley Idehen (2013-07-02 23:31:13)
>> In a way, Linked Data is actually Linked Open Data (when its based on
>> standards). The problem is that Linked Open Data is now perceived as
>> meaning Publicly available Linked Data (just like "Open Source" and
>> "Free Software" were never meant to mean Free as in $0.00 software
>> etc..)
> Now I am _really_ confused.
>
> Do you now say that "Linked Open Data" is simply "Linked Data" that
> follows Open standards, and not about being public available?

As I said, we have a terminology mess++.

In the W3C world clearly Linked Open Data (LOD) is now pitched as Public 
Linked Data. But that kind of positioning makes no sense and is utterly 
indefensible.

"Open systems were those that would meet agreed specifications or 
standards. This resulted in the formation of X/Open Company Ltd whose 
remit was, and today in the guise of The Open Group remains, to define a 
comprehensive open systems environment. Open systems, they declared, 
would save on costs, attract a wider portfolio of applications and 
competition on equal terms. X/Open chose the UNIX system as the platform 
for the basis of open systems."

-- excerpt from Unix History [1] (I worked as a Unix consultant at 
Unisys in the late 80's prior to founding OpenLink Software).

>
> Seems to me that's the complete opposite as W3C is saying at
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/#x5-star-linked-open-data>:
>> 5 Star Linked Open Data refers to an incremental framework for
>> deploying data. Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the Web and initiator
>> of the Linked Data project, suggested a 5 star deployment scheme for
>> Linked Open Data. The 5 Star Linked Data system is cumulative. Each
>> additional star presumes the data meets the criteria of the previous
>> step(s). 5 Star Linked Open Data includes an Open License (expression
>> of rights) and assumes publications on the public Web.
>>
>> Organizations may elect to publish 5 Star Linked Data, without the
>> word "open", implying that the data does not include an Open License
>> (expression of rights) and does not imply publication on the public
>> Web.
>
> Regards,
>
>   - Jonas
>

Yes, they are saying the complete opposite.

"Open" doesn't mean public, it never has re., technology. "Open" as 
popularized by Unix was all about standards and interoperability. URIs 
and a standard model for structured data representation lead to Linked 
(due to HTTP URIs) Open Data (due to EAV). You have a fine-grained 
Semantic Web (due to RDF which makes Relationship Semantics *explicit* 
and machine-comprehensible).

Anyway, you should work with terminology that works best for you, 
getting the message across (as coherently as possible) is what matters 
the most :-)

Links:

1. http://www.unix.org/what_is_unix/history_timeline.html -- Unix 
History & Timeline .

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen