Re: SKOS and Freebase

Tom is correct.

Let's be clear, the data still has to be linked for LCSH concepts. There is
much work to be done on that front.

I have been continually applying most high level LCSH concepts to Freebase
manually, but a better interface for human curation and aligning and
linking the LCSH concepts to Freebase is what is needed (but a lot of that
could be done with OpenRefine and other automated tools).  It would be even
more awesome for other folks to bear and share that burden and help build
or refine the existing tools to help with automation.



On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
>
>> I got messed up with my mail splitting: but I really want to flag that
>> Thad's
>>
>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/public-vocabs/2013Oct/**0142.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2013Oct/0142.html>
>>>
>> is really awesome.And seems a good case in favour of SKOS data, for all
>> those who want to do something similar but can't handle the poliferation of
>> namespaces.
>
>
> One caution - that example isn't representative.  Of the 389,668 Library
> of Congress Subject Heading (LCSH) concepts in Freebase, only 7,842 have
> been linked to an equivalent Freebase topic.  Also the LCSH was  loaded in
> 2010 and, as far as I'm aware, hasn't been updated since.  I suspect the
> hierarchy is relatively stable, but the lack of currency is something else
> to be aware of.
>
> It demonstrates interesting possibilities, but it isn't useful for much in
> its current form.
>
> Tom
>



-- 
-Thad
Thad on Freebase.com <http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry>
Thad on LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>