W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > May 2009

Re: Yet Another LOD cloud browser

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:57:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4A117742.7030806@openlinksw.com>
To: David Huynh <dfhuynh@alum.mit.edu>
CC: Sherman Monroe <sdmonroe@gmail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, semantic-web@w3.org
David Huynh wrote:
> Sherman Monroe wrote:
>> Kingsley wrote:
>>
>>     There are half a dozen Entities across N graphs in the Quad Store.
>>     The UI issue here is that we don't show the source Graphs in the
>>     results page. Reason, we know we can actually provide distinct
>>     results cheaper than listing the Graph Names etc..
>>
>>     Your timing is borderline impeccable, we will actually be
>>     releasing the Distinct optimization that showcases what I mean.
>>     Anyway, for now, when you select one of the Microsofts from
>>     DBpedia graphs, click on the "Stats" link, it will give you a back
>>     door view of where the data has come from.
>>
>>
>> David, also keep in mind that this is one of the benefits of 
>> set-based browsing. If I have a results set of twenty synonymous URIs 
>> representing Microsoft, for someone researching Microsoft, such a 
>> list would be a goldmine, because I can click razorbase -> 
>> Information and view all information for all 20 versions of that one 
>> entity simultaneously. In fact, when I get sparse results for an 
>> entity, I always click the razorbase -> Information -> "Alternative 
>> Identities" (e.g. owl:sameAs) and also I look under the reverse 
>> properties for the same, to pull any alias that I may not be away of.
> Hi Sherman,
>
> I guess I'm just trying to close the gap between Google's search 
> results--which people are familiar with--and  razorbase's or any novel 
> search engine's results. For example, when I search for Microsoft on 
> Google, the first result not only IS what I want, but also LOOKs like 
> what I want. I can make the decision to click on it within maybe 1 or 
> 2 seconds. 
But what happens when you want an entity associated with pattern: 
Microsoft that isn't the highly referenced company: Microsoft, in 
google's document index?

The view we have is this:

1. Hook into Google and Yahoo and MSFT for pages and even apply a 
weighting or our algorithm so that Google|Yahoo|MSFT first page will be 
the same as ours (* this is deliberately not part of the LOD instance 
since sponging is disabled for now*)
2. Extend this somewhat popularity skewed algorithm with the ability to  
disambiguate  using Entity Type ( Category re. Sherman's UI) and 
Properties (Information re. Sherman's UI).

> The URL "www.microsoft.com" in that search result is perhaps the most 
> convincing element, as I know only *the* Microsoft can possibly own 
> that domain. (This will be a challenge for any SW search engine, 
> because no-one can own any URI, and so, seeing a URI alone means 
> pretty much nothing. 
URI means: here is the Identifier for an Data Object in this Data Space. 
It means that a simple click will unravel its essence in a 
representation overtly or covertly negotiated between user agent and 
data server.
> That's one of the main differences between URL and URI, which is 
> usually swept under the rug.)
I hope I've taken it out from under the rug. A URL is a URI :-)
>
> I believe that these "little details" play a big role in how users 
> interact with SW search engines. It's not just that the search engine 
> should return the right result, but that it should convince the user 
> that the right result is right.
>
Sure, and hopefully, we will collectively make all of these things 
clearer :-)

Kingsley
>>     As always, enjoy chatting with you :-)
>>
>>
>> Indeed, the LOD owes a lot to your work!!
>
> Glad to have helped! :)
>
> David
>
>
>


-- 


Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 14:57:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:29 GMT