Re: LD Glossary - feedback on form of publishing

Hi Benedikt:

I personally like the way you have laid out the linked data glossary. A 
further comment is that we could use some of the dcat terms as 
illustrations because (a) the glossary came from GLD which is also 
producing dcat, and (b) a glossary intrinsically is a catalog / collection 
of data (concepts). 

Now that we have the recommendations of WG chairs, if you decide to build 
further, I can volunteer help. 
Regards,
--Biplav
 
 
 



From:
Bernadette Hyland <bhyland@3roundstones.com>
To:
Benedikt Kaempgen <kaempgen@fzi.de>
Cc:
"public-gld-wg@w3.org" <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
Date:
03/19/2013 07:03 PM
Subject:
Re: LD Glossary - feedback on form of publishing



Hi Benedikt,
Thank you for your feedback regarding the LD glossary.  The world would be 
a better place if more people published more content as Linked Data. 

The GLD WG has had several conversations about publishing the LD Glossary 
during Summer 2012. [1]  We resolved to publish the glossary as a Working 
Group Note in March 203. [2]  We're pushing up the end of our charter and 
do not have time to change things we've resolved in the interest of time.

That said, I encourage you to republish the glossary as LD as long as it 
conforms to good stable URI policy.  You don't have to sell anyone on the 
benefits of publishing the content as RDF (RDF/XML, Turtle/RDF, etc), 
there is agreement on all of that.

If you choose to do this using Semantic MediaWiki, please feel free to do 
so.  For clarification, the GLD does not "feature Semantic MediaWiki", 
rather Semantic MediaWiki is a piece of tooling provided by the W3C that 
our group and others can use AFAIK.

Cheers,

Bernadette Hyland, co-chair 
W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/

[1] http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/meeting/2012-08-23

[2]  see http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/meeting/2013-03-14#resolution_1

On Mar 15, 2013, at 4:42 AM, Benedikt Kaempgen <kaempgen@fzi.de> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> I have feedback regarding the Linked Data glossary. Sorry that I did not 
speak up, yesterday, but I first had to get my head around it.
> 
> Looking at the Linked Data glossary [5], I am happy that the GLD has 
produced something like this; the form it is published, however, I am not 
too fond of.
> 
> For me, a glossary always also is a kind of vocabulary and I am strongly 
in favor of publishing the glossary as Linked Data.
> 
> Publishing the glossary as a Working Group Note representing the state 
of the glossary on 15 May 2013, I do not mind, however, I suggest to have 
a live version of the glossary in the GLD wiki.
> 
> I have started to create such a version [6].
> 
> This would bring the following advantages.
> 
> 1) Since GLD features Semantic MediaWiki, every page is automatically 
also published as Linked Data. Therefore, every term gets a URI, e.g.,
> 
> * Term: "5 Star Linked Data"
> * HTML page in wiki: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/5_Star_Linked_Data
> * Information resource (RDF): 
http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Special:ExportRDF/5_Star_Linked_Data
> * Non-information resource: 
http://w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Special:URIResolver/5_Star_Linked_Data
> 
> This means, publishers can reuse our Linked Data terms in their datasets 
and vocabularies.
> 
> Semantic MediaWiki supports content negotiation (GLD wiki currently does 
not, which is strange) and we could also set it up to serve nicer URIs 
[1].
> 
> 2) The glossary can be updated more easily. Just see [4] to add a new 
Linked Data term.
> 
> 3) One can watch Linked Data terms (so that you get noticed when terms 
change) and check the history of terms (including information about the 
person who did the change). Also, every page has a discussion page where 
one can discuss the meaning of a term without interfering with its current 
content.
> 
> 4) We can add all kinds of more unstructured information to a "Linked 
Data term", e.g., links, pictures. Also, we are flexible to add more 
structured annotations to terms, e.g., owl:sameAs or skos:broader / 
skos:narrower links; those would also be published as Linked Data.
> 
> 5) We can provide the entire glossary as downloadable XML/RDF [2] or 
Turtle/RDF file [3].
> 
> I would be happy to hear your opinion on this.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Benedikt
> 
> 
> [1] <http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Pretty_URIs>
> [2] <
http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Special:Ask/-5B-5BCategory:Linked-20Data-20term-5D-5D/-3FShort-20description/-3FHas-20reference/format%3Drdf/syntax%3Drdfxml/limit%3D500
>
> [3] <
http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Special:Ask/-5B-5BCategory:Linked-20Data-20term-5D-5D/-3FShort-20description/-3FHas-20reference/format%3Drdf/syntax%3Dturtle/limit%3D500
>
> [4] <http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Category:Linked_Data_term>
> [5] <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/glossary/index.html>
> [6] <http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/Linked_Data_Glossary>
> 
>