Re: ISSUE-28: Is a vocabulary 5-star? [Best Practices]

Hi,
Thanks for updating BP Vocab Checklist wiki page.  

We're writing this for an audience who may or may not be able to assess qualitative statements like "good use of".  What makes "good use?"  If you're new to LOD, you may have no idea.  Rather than posing an interrogative (a question), tell them what is a best practice and explain why it matters.  Show an example.

Consider reviewing a W3C Recommendation format that is a good "template".  It gives short, succinct best practices in a way that is easily "digestible".[1]  If others have better examples, we're totally open.  Some degree of consistency between current W3C recommendations is desirable IMO.

For example, in the current vocab selection checklist [2] you write:
 Are they good use of rdfs:label and rdfs:comment?
The vocabulary should be self-descriptive. Each Class and Property should have a label and comments associated.

Consider:
---------%<-------

1.1 Vocabularies should be self-descriptive.

1.1.1 What it means

Each property or term in a vocabulary should have a Label, Definition and Comment defined.

Self-describing data suggests that information about the encodings used for each representation is provided explicitly within the representation.  The ability for Linked Data to describe itself, to place itself in context, contributes to the usefulness of the underlying data. 

For example, popular vocabulary called DCMI Metadata Terms has a Term Name Contributor http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-contributor which has a:

Label: Contributor
Definition: An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Comment: Examples of a Contributor include a person, an organization, or a service.

<further description as needed ...>

----------

Thus, my recommendation is:
1) Best practices are listed up front as declarative statements.  
2) All have a "What it means" and short explanation and example, if possible.
3) We consider using the mobile web rec as our "template" format.
4) The authors of the wiki page(s) make the changes so the editors don't have so much to do that it become impossible for three people.  TIA.

Cheers,
Bernadette Hyland

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/REC-mwabp-20101214/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/222_Best_Practices_for_Vocab_Selection#Vocabulary_Selection_Criteria_checklist


On Feb 10, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Ghislain Atemezing wrote:

> Thanks Michael!!
> 
>> See BERNARD VATANT's great post at:
>> 
>> http://blog.hubjects.com/2012/02/is-your-linked-data-vocabulary-5-star_9588.html
> 
> Many of the ideas behind are very closed to what we discussed at DERI during the F2F2 and available also in our wiki in the vocab selection checklist[1].
> 
> We can maybe provide a small service that gives "stars" to vocabs...I guess it is similar to the ideas of our last telecon to provide a kind of form or something equivalent.
> 
> Best,
> Ghislain
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/222_Best_Practices_for_Vocab_Selection#Vocabulary_Selection_Criteria_checklist
> -- 
> Ghislain Atemezing
> EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
> 2229, route des Crêtes, 06560 Sophia Antipolis, France.
> e-mail: auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr & ghislain.atemezing@gmail.com
> Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8178
> Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
> Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~atemezin
> 
>