W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Visualizing LOD Linkage

From: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2008 09:54:54 +0100
Message-ID: <82593ac00808060154r1f1a845erfbe3f3085081a1e6@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Peter Ansell" <ansell.peter@gmail.com>
Cc: "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-lod@w3.org, "Richard Cyganiak" <richard@cyganiak.de>


> It depends on whether you know that the external references are distinct just based on the URI string. If someone links out to multiple formats using external resource links then they would have to be counted as multiple links as you have no way of knowing that they are different, except in the case where you reserve these types of links as RDF literals.

I am not sure if I interpret it correctly - do you mean that you could
link to two URIs which are in fact sameAs in the target dataset?
Indeed, in that case, the measure would be slightly higher than what
it should be. However, I would think that it is rarely (if not never)
the case.

> I think a more effective way is to measure both the number of outbound and inbound links, something which is only possible if you have a way of determining in the rest of the web who links back to a particular resource in your own scheme. If you count inbound links, like Google do with PageRank, then you get a better idea of who is actually being used as opposed to who is just linking into all the others it can find. See [1] for a description of it in the Bio2RDF project.

I think this measure of inbound links is more related to a
"usefulness" metric, as highlighted by Richard. Again, I do not
attempt to propose such a measure.
I just want the raw number of "outbound links to other datasets" to be
*comparable* amongst datasets.


> Cheers,
> Peter
> [1] http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69828-9_15

(link appears to be broken)

Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2008 08:55:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:15:52 UTC