- From: Laufer <laufer@globo.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 15:09:41 -0300
- To: Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>
- Cc: Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br>, DWBP WG <public-dwbp-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CA+pXJiiH=aE5sQntAY9NOv9Zg6jNVuZMxi0LxZO2MaFCdLYbCw@mail.gmail.com>
Thank, you, Eric. Abraços, Laufer 2015-03-20 12:31 GMT-03:00 Eric Stephan <ericphb@gmail.com>: > Laufer and Bernadette, > > I raised an issue relating to this asking the question can we use 5 star > as a metric and not a path? http://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/track/issues/148 > > Eric S. > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Bernadette Farias Lóscio <bfl@cin.ufpe.br > > wrote: > >> Hi Laufer, >> >> Thanks for the message! It is a very useful explanation! >> >> I fully agree with you: "In this dataset publishing I can see the idea of >> publishing metadata and using standard vocabularies, but is not a LD >> dataset." >> >> IMHO, we can use vocabularies to publish metadata, but we are not doing >> linked data, i.e., there are no links between resources. >> >> I also agree that "we should differentiate the idea of a Best Practice of >> a non LD dataset of the idea of an implicit Best Practice to go to a LD >> dataset, that is what the 5 stars scale says.". >> >> If we have a BP whose implementation proposes the use of the RDF model to >> publish data, then we are moving towards the 5 stars. It is important to >> note that, publishind data using the RDF model may be just one of the >> proposed approaches for implementation, i.e, we may show other ways of >> publishing data without using RDF. >> >> Cheers, >> Bernadette >> >> >> >> >> 2015-03-20 11:32 GMT-03:00 Laufer <laufer@globo.com>: >> >> Hi all, >>> >>> I will start my comment using an example: >>> >>> Someone publish a page where there are links to 2 files: >>> a csv file with a dataset; >>> a text file that explains the structure of the dataset, in natural >>> language (metadata). >>> >>> In the page there are a lot of metadata provided in natural language, as >>> for example, an overview of the dataset, license, organization, version, >>> creator, rights, etc... >>> >>> At the same time, the page has an embedded dcat instance using rdfa >>> where there are info about the dataset, the distribution, etc. >>> >>> What I want to say is that we have here the metadata concept mixed with >>> semantic web concepts, and it is a way of publishing data that, if all the >>> things are well described, could be very useful to the society. >>> >>> In this dataset publishing I can see the idea of publishing metadata and >>> using standard vocabularies, but is not a LD dataset. >>> >>> What I was discussing in the last meeting is: will we support in the >>> document the idea that the best way to publish is LD. I am not saying that >>> I am against or not the idea. I am favorable to LD. But we should >>> differentiate the idea of a Best Practice of a non LD dataset of the idea >>> of an implicit Best Practice to go to a LD dataset, that is what the 5 >>> stars scale says. >>> >>> Maybe is too much care with the words, sorry about this. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Laufer >>> >>> -- >>> . . . .. . . >>> . . . .. >>> . .. . >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Bernadette Farias Lóscio >> Centro de Informática >> Universidade Federal de Pernambuco - UFPE, Brazil >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > -- . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. .
Received on Friday, 20 March 2015 18:10:10 UTC