- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:16:02 -0400
- To: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- CC: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, foaf-dev Friend of a <foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org>
Hugh Glaser wrote: > Hi Kingsley. > It is great for people to be able to find a lot of the LOD cloud at your site, but please be careful about your claims concerning the data you have crawled from LOD. > To say "our actual VoiD graph for LOD cloud" is to mislead readers into thinking that it captures more than it does. > Yes, and No. Remember, I did try to partition the LOD-Cloud by Warehouse, Sponged/RDFized, and Crawled, but nobody would have it. What we have right now is the LOD-Cloud Warehouse. Also note, when you look at the VoiD graph you are seeing Graph Group IRIs (containers of Graphs that contain Triples), so you need to drill down a level or two. Also, if you feel a dataset dump is missing from the LOD-Cloud pictorial, please don't hesitate to hola etc.. BTW - I don't equate the LOD-Cloud pictorial as being equivalent to the Linked Data Web :-) Kingsley > Best > Hugh > > > On 28/04/2009 13:10, "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > As for the % re. FOAF, I think that can be determined from our actual > VoiD graph for LOD cloud [1]. I don't know off the top of my head if > FOAF is up to 50%. > >> The "Linked" part of the name implies that crawling is a valid tactic >> to gather the data to me. >> > Not disputing that, just describing what we have in the instance :-) > Remember, we've sponged (crawled and RDFized) data since inception of > our participation in this space. > > Links: > > 1. http://lod.openlinksw.com/void/Dataset > > Kingsley > > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2009 00:16:42 UTC