W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > February 2010

Re: Terminology when talking about Linked Data

From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:01:04 +0100
Message-ID: <1f2ed5cd1002170301m2008afdakc5420718ee5bab3@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
Cc: nathan@webr3.org, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
PS.
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html

On 17 February 2010 12:00, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> wrote:
> For a definition of Linked Data I'd suggest anything that conforms to
> timbl's Linked Data expectations:
>
>   1. Use URIs as names for things
>   2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names.
>   3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information, using
> the standards (RDF, SPARQL)
>   4. Include links to other URIs. so that they can discover more things.
>
> While Tim only lists RDF & SPARQL as the standards, pragmatically I
> reckon there's a bit of leeway here, e.g. a HTML document or Atom feed
> is likely to contain links and data that can be interpreted as RDF -
> in fact *any* hyperlink could be seen as an RDF statement (maybe
> <docA> dc:relation <docB>), so depending on the context a looser
> definition of linked data as "linky stuff" doesn't seem unreasonable.
>
> Cheers,
> Danny.
>
> --
> http://danny.ayers.name
>



-- 
http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 11:01:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:25 UTC