W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2012

Re: Cultural Heritage Data

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:30:09 +0200
Message-ID: <4FBB86D1.808@few.vu.nl>
To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
CC: "<public-lod@w3.org>" <public-lod@w3.org>, "<DOLDMAN@thebritishmuseum.ac.uk>" <DOLDMAN@thebritishmuseum.ac.uk>, "<lod-lam@googlegroups.com>" <lod-lam@googlegroups.com>
Hi Hugh,


> Well Dominic's site is definitely not isolated.
> It is very well linked at the ontology level, not instance, however.
> I thought his question was timely, since TimBL asked the question at the panel at LOD2012 as to whether the criteria for inclusion in the LOD Cloud should be changed.



Yep. As far as I'm concerned, something like a sort of mix between the LOD cloud and the LOV one (http://labs.mondeca.com/dataset/lov/) would be really interesting.
But still someone needs to volunteer (as opposed to "being requested") to do it :-)


> Personally I think it is a shame that such a resource should lose a lot of its visibility because it does not pass the rules.
> And I think that putting links in simply to get into the Cloud is not something that should be encouraged - links should be put in because they are sensible.
> Without visibility, others (such as you!) will be less aware of it and so not build the links that would actually bring it into the cloud without Dominic doing anything (as you are now thinking of doing, since Dominic has made you more aware of it).


Yep. In fact this is part of the reasons why the Library Linked Data incubator decided to create its own group on The Data Hub (http://thedatahub.org/group/lld). It helped us to make the datasets from our community more visible to our community, without making it a hard pre-requisite to adhere to other communities' requirements.
Some nodes (or group of nodes) at
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/XGR-lld-vocabdataset/#Library_Linked_Data_at_CKAN
are indeed "isolated", in the LOD cloud sense.

Antoine


>
> On 22 May 2012, at 08:42, Antoine Isaac wrote:
>
>> Hi Dominic,
>>
>> I guess that it was with the LOD *cloud* that you had issues. It looks a bit severe, but I think I understand the motivations: if the cloud admitted isolated nodes, it would have many of them, and that would look weird... But of course that does not make your contribution less interesting. On the contrary, the BL work has incredible potential for our domain!
>> Btw let me know if you're interested in links with data.europeana.eu. We can maybe try something...
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Antoine
>>
>> PS: I'm copying the email to the LOD-LAM list: I suppose some people will be interested to continue the discussion with you there!
>>
>>
>>> +1 (best I can do).  FWIW, the day buying your way in ceases to be the certain method of acceptance will be a very good day for all.
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>> --
>>> *From:* Dominic Oldman<DOLDMAN@thebritishmuseum.ac.uk>
>>> *To:* public-lod@w3.org
>>> *Sent:* Monday, May 21, 2012 1:10 PM
>>> *Subject:* Cultural Heritage Data
>>>
>>> Hugh suggested that I post this.
>>> We are currently working with other museums aligning our catalogue data using the CIDOC-CRM ontology. We can now run single federated queries based on semantic alignment without the need to insert specific linking triples. When we applied to advertise our site on the LOD cloud we were turned down because we hadnít inserted specific links to other data sources. I realise that I could just stuff in a few links to Dbpedia to get accepted - but given that we can harmonise data to a very high degree with another open CRM RDF data source perhaps we should still be allowed formal acceptance to the open data community.
>>> Dominic Oldman
>>> *Deputy Head of IS *
>>> *IS Development Manager*
>>> *ResearchSpace Principal Investigator*
>>> *British Museum*
>>> +44 (0)20 73238796
>>> +44 (0)7980 865309
>>> www.BritishMuseum.org
>>> www.ResearchSpace.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 12:31:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:39 UTC