Feedback on LD glossary

Hi Dave,
Guess you're back from holiday ... ;-)  Thanks for your feedback.  Please see inline responses below.

On Mar 19, 2013, at 2:04 PM, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com> wrote:

> Suggestions for first 40 below, which may duplicate others.
> 
> > 1. 5 Star Linked Data
> 
> Drop final sentence and mug picture, that's out of place here.

Done.

> 
> > 2. 5 Star Linked Data Diagram
> 
> Drop this entry.

I think it adds value & is line with discussions the GLD WG has had to provide diagrams & collateral that help describe the value of LOD for open gov't content.  I've emailed Michael H. to confirm however that it is published with a suitable open content license as that is a must have.

> 
> > 8. CKAN
> 
> Drop this. I agree with James, you would need to either reference *all* relevant software packages or none. None seems better.

OK, I've looked into the concerns you & James raised.  I was thinking of CKAN when it was the public registry of open knowledge datasets that the LD community used.  I've since learned it would be more accurate to say TheDatahub.org, is a widely used public registry of open knowledge datasets but to avoid confusion (due to the changed business model), I have removed CKAN from the glossary.  

CKAN and other vendors are welcome to put an entry in the LD Community Directory [which is currently being revamped and will be re-launched in April].  

> 
> > 9. Closed World
> 
> s/external work/external world/

Done.

> 
> > 13. Controlled Vocabularies
> 
> Suggested rephrase:
> 
> [[[
> A controlled vocabulary is a selected set of terms that can be used to index, tag or describe units of information. By providing a restricted and managed set of terms they can be used to reduce ambiguity in information systems. Such vocabularies may be unstructured (e.g. code lists) or may be organized into increasingly complex knowledge organization schemes (taxonomies, thesauri, ontologies). In traditional settings the terms in the controlled vocabularies are words or phrases, in a linked data setting then they are normally assigned unique identifiers (URIs) which in turn link to descriptive phrases.
> ]]]

Thank you for improved wording.  Done.

> 
> > 17. D2RQ
> > 18. D2RQ Platform
> > 19. D2RQ Mapping Language
> 
> Given that there is now a W3C standard for this is seems more appropriate to reference that instead. Delete these and insert:
> 
> [[[
> R2RML
> 
> <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/r2rml/">R2RML</a> (RDB to RDF Mapping Language) is a language for expressing customized mappings from relational databases to RDF datasets. Such mappings provide the ability to view existing relational data in the RDF data model, expressed in a structure and target vocabulary of the mapping author's choice.
> ]]]
> 

Done. Removed D2RQ, D2RQ Platform and Mapping language.  Added R3RML.  

> > 20. Database to RDF Queueing
> 
> Drop.

Done. 

> 
> [Or if not drop then s/Queueing/Querying/ and change the reference to be to R2RML.]
> 
> > 23. Data Market
> 
> This entry makes no sense to me. I wonder if it was suppose to be "Data Mart"?
> 
> Suggest drop.
> 
> If you really meant "Data Market" then suggest entry:
> 
> [[[
> A Data Market or Data Marketplace is an online (broker) service to enable discovery and access to a large collection of datasets offered by a range of data providers. Examples include Infochimps, Azure Marketplace and Factual.  Data Marketplaces may include open as well as paid-for data, and may offer value added services such as APIs and visualizations as well as pure data access.
> ]]]
> 

I think it is an important term and appreciate your wording.  I tweaked slightly to:

<h4>Data Market</h4>
A data market, also called a data marketplace, is an online (broker) service to enable discovery and access to a large collection of datasets offered by a range of data providers. Examples include Infochimps, Azure Marketplace and Factual.  Data Markets may include open as well as paid-for data, and may offer value added services such as <a href="#API">APIs</a> and visualizations and programmatic data access.


> > 24. Data Warehouse
> 
> Hmmm. Possible rewrite:
> 
> [[[
> A Data Warehouse is one approach to data integration in which data from various operational data systems is extracted, cleaned, transformed and copied to a centralized repository. The centralized repository can then be used for data mining or answering analytical queries.
> ]]]
> 
> That rewrite misses out the red-rag-to-a-bull comment on how Linked Data is an alternative. The story there is a lot more complex than the existing entry suggests. If you really want something to about the relationship to linked data then that will take rather more work to phrase just right.

Thanks for the proposed rewrite.  Yes, the story of how LD compares is more complex but something (accurate but brief) is better than nothing IMO.  How about:

<h4>Data Warehouse</h4>
A data warehouse is one approach to data integration in which data from various operational data systems is extracted, cleaned, transformed and copied to a centralized repository. The centralized repository can then be used for data mining or answering analytical queries.  By contrast, Linked Data <em>assumes and accounts</em> for a <em>distributed approach</em> using HTTP URIs to describe and access information resources.  A Linked Data approach is seen as an valid alternative to the centralized data warehouse approach especially when integrating open government datasets.

We remain open to editing...


> > 27. Description Logic
> 
> Reads a bit OW1-ish. Maybe replace:
> 
> [[[
> Two variants of the Web Ontology Language (OWL), specifically OWL Lite and OWL DL are based on Description Logic.
> ]]]
> 
> with
> 
> [[[
> The Web Ontology Language (OWL) provides a standards-based way to exchange ontologies and includes a Description Logic semantics as well as an RDF based semantics.
> ]]]

Done. Thank you.

> 
> > 28. Descriptor Resource
> 
> Suggest dropping. Doesn't seem like common usage.

Done.

> 
> > 30. Directed Graph
> 
> Suggest s/differentiated/labelled/

Done. Simple is better.

> 
> > 33. Dublin Core Element Set
> 
> I tend to think of DC Elements as referring to 1.0 and DC Terms to 1.1. Certainly the page you link to is called "dmci-terms".
> 
> Suggest s/Element Set/Metadata Terms/ in both title and body.

Good catch.  How about we just stick with the core 15 terms widely used.  Are you OK with this?

<h4>Dublin Core Metadata Element Set</h4>
Dublin Core Metadata Element Set refers to a <a href="#vocabulary">vocabulary</a> of fifteen properties for use in resource descriptions, such as may be found in a library card catalog (creator, publisher, etc).  The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, also known as "DC Elements", is the most commonly used vocabulary for Linked Data applications. See also [<a href="http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/"> Dublin Core Element Set, Version 1.1 Specification.</a>] [<a href="#dublin-core-metadata-initiative" target="_blank">DCMI</a>]


> 
> > 37. Free/Libre/Open Source Software
> 
> s/Sour/Source/
> 
> s/Sourceforge is a public repository of such software.//
> [Either mention all or mention none]

Done. Removed Sourceforge.

> 
> > 39. Hash URI Strategy
> 
> Urgh. That one needs a rewrite (and to be paired with one slash URIs). Run out of time to suggest something now ...

How about we remove it.  I don't hear many open gov data people chatting in the halls about hash URI strategies or loosing sleep over it.  Removed.

Please review updated version to confirm your feedback/corrections are correctly integrated.  We're at 120 terms now.  See https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/glossary/index.html

Cheers,
Bernadette

> 
> 
> On 18/03/13 21:34, Bernadette Hyland wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Per our last telecon on Thursday (14-Mar), we agreed to do an internal sanity check on the glossary before moving this to a WG Note.  Later this week I plan to reach out to a number of authors of references on Linked Data for peer review, (i,e., J. Hendler, C. Bizer, T. Heath, D. Wood, M. Zaidman, et al.) once the GLD WG has reviewed.
>> 
>> Please consider reviewing the 122 glossary terms [1] prior this Thursday call, that would be very helpful.  Please keep in mind the target audience for this LD glossary is Web developers coming up the curve on basic concepts around publishing data on the Web as LOD, it is not intended as an academic reference per se.
>> 
>> The editors will take the lead on folding in feedback asap.  Please cut & paste the current & proposed language & reply to this thread.
>> 
>> We'd link the terms to other deliverables including the vocabularies and BP docs during the LC process, and encourage cross linking with dependency and liaison groups in due course.
>> 
>> Thank you in advance for your time reviewing the LD glossary.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Bernadette Hyland, co-chair
>> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
>> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>> 
>> [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/glossary/index.html
>> 
> 
>