- From: Ghislain Atemezing <auguste.atemezing@eurecom.fr>
- Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 11:35:33 +0100
- To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
- CC: public-gld-wg@w3.org, Bernadette Hyland <bhyland@3roundstones.com>
Hi Dave, Thanks again for all your suggestions... Many of them have been updated to the Glossary see the actual version here [1] > Suggestions for the remainder ... > > > 39. Hash URI Strategy > > Suggested rewrite: > > [[[ > Hash URI Pattern > > In creating and publishing Linked Data a key design decision is the > pattern of URIs to use for the resources in the data. One aspect of that > decision is whether to use "hash" URIs (URIs which end in a '#fragid' > fragment identifier) or "slash" URIs (no fragment identifier). Hash URIs > offer a simple way to separate the URI for the thing from the URL for a > data document describing the thing. They are convenient when publishing > small files of resources (e.g. small vocabularies) but limit > implementation options and extensibility (because the fragment > identifier is never seen by the data server). > See also [Slash URI Pattern] > ]]] In the last sentence, is there any reference to refer to? Or it is widely known? At the moment, I've added the term but with a suggestion to be voted by the group. > In which case also add: > > [[[ > Slash URI Pattern > > In creating and publishing Linked Data a key design decision is the > pattern of URIs to use for the resources in the data. One aspect of that > decision is whether to use "hash" URIs (URIs which end in a '#fragid' > fragment identifier) or "slash" URIs (no fragment identifier). Slash > URIs provide maximum flexibility since the data server will see the full > URI when it is dereferenced. > ]]] Idem Hash URI pattern > > 43. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) > > s/had/has/ > > or > > s/had defined/defines and maintains/ I have chosen the first suggestion. Done! > > 44. Inference > > Suggested rephrase: > > s/To infer something is to create a new relationship./Inference is the > process of deriving logical conclusions from a set of starting > assumptions./ Done! Thanks. > > 48. Linked Data > > Suggested rephrase: > > [[[ > Linked data refers to a set of best practices for creating, publishing > and announcing structured data on the Web. See [Linked Data Principles]. > Linked Data typically makes use of the RDF family of standards for data > interchange (RDF/XML, Turtle) and query (SPARQL). Linked Data can be > published by a person or organization behind the firewall or on the > public Web. If Linked Data is published on the public Web, it is > generally called Linked Open Data. > ]]] Done, with a slight modification in the 3rd sentence. [[Linked Data is *not* the same as RDF, rather Linked Data uses the RDF family of standards for data interchange ( RDF/XML, N3, Turtle and N-Triples) and query (SPARQL).]] > > 50. Linked Data Principles > > Suggest deleting the last sentence, viz: > > [[[ > Linked Data Principles provide a common API for data on the Web which is > more convenient than many separately and differently designed APIs > published by individual data suppliers. > ]]] > > I understand what it's saying, and there's some truth in there. But > follow-your-nose linked data is not a sufficient API. If it were we > wouldn't need the Linked Data Platform and LDA. > I don't understand your point here. Maybe rephrasing what you understand and pointing out the difference/link wiht Linked Data Platform may be helpful. WDYT? > > 52. Linked Open Data Cloud > > Suggest > > s/datasets/interconnected datasets/ Done! Thanks. > I think that's a defining feature of the LOD Cloud. > > > Linking Open Data Project > > I think this is supposed to be a new entry but is currently a run-on > paragraph of "Linking Government Data" Yes. > > 55. Machine Readable Data > > This doesn't seem to actually say what Machine Readable Data is, maybe > that's too obvious. > > The example talks about machine and human readable data from the same > page but uses *different* pages (wikipedia v. dbpedia). > > How about: > > [[[ > Machine readable data is data that is available in a format which a > machine can usefully interpret and process. For example, if a set of > figures is given in a table in a PDF file or an HTML page then it can be > transmitted and displayed but can't be easily processed. Screen-scraping > techniques may be able to reconstruct the tabular data from the > formatted page but they are fragile and inconvenient. For this reason > publishing data in a machine readable format qualifies for two-stars on > the 5-star scale. > ]]] So, if we rephrase this, do we need to add terms like "Scrapping", "Screen scrapping" or "Data aggregation" ? > > 63. Ontology > > Suggested rewrite: > > [[[ > An ontology is a formal model of a domain. It describes the types of > things that exist (classes), the relationships between them (properties) > and the logical ways those classes and properties can be used together > (axioms). The OWL (Web Ontology Language) family of languages provide a > standardized-means for expressing and exchanging ontologies. It builds > upon, and is compatible with, RDF. > ]]] Done. Thanks! > > 66. Open World > > s/external work/external world/ > > > 69. Persistent Identifier Scheme > > Has a spurious ">" Done. > > 70. Predicate > > Suggested rephrase: > > [[[ > The predicate is the second part of an RDF statement and gives the > property which connects the subject of the statement to the object of > the statement. Thus in the informal statement "Alice knows Bob" then > "knows" is the predicate which connects "Alice" (the subject of the > statement) to "Bob" (the object of the statement). The term predicate > derives from predicate calculus. In RDF we use the terms predicate (for > the role) and property (for the thing that plays that role) regardless > of whether the value of the property is a simple literal or some other > resource. > ]]] Added. Thanks! > > 74. Quad Store > > Suggest adding: > > [[[ > This notion has been clarified and standardized in SPARQL in the form of > /RDF Datasets/. > ]]] Done! > > 76. Raw Data > > That's very contentious, suggest dropping this entry. > > [The issue is that to a statistician "raw data" is observed data that > has not yet been aggregated, analysed and validated. In that world > releasing raw data without extreme care to qualify it is correctly > regarded as professional bad practice. Given how much government data > falls in the area of statistics then a huge amount of confusion, > antagonism and justified horror was caused by the cry of "raw data now". > Government statistical authorities go to a lot of trouble and have legal > statutory obligations on what data standards have to be met by releases > of statistical data.] Maybe we can just change it "Source Data" as it is in the BP doc? See [2] > > > 83. RDF-JSON > > That reference is *not* a W3C recommendation (to my great sadness) it is > an editor's draft which I don't think is progressing anywhere. Instead > W3C is doing json-ld. > > Probably the best thing is to drop this entry. > > [Though part of me wants it to stay in just as it is :)] And what if we don't drop it (for now) and correct that it is draft? Well, I propose to vote here. > > > 84. RDF Schema > > s/schema language/vocabulary language/ Done! > > > 90. Schema > > Given how much people confuse schemas, logical data models and > ontologies then I'm not happy with the statement that an ontology is a > form a schema. > > However, I don't know enough about why schema is on this list and what > you mean by schema in this context to offer a rephrase. > > Any chance of just dropping it? I thing it could remains and can justify the different "schemas" (e.g. in UML) we have sometimes in the documentation of our vocabulary. What about this one: [[ Schema: A data model that represents the relationships between a set of concepts, [e.g. using UML diagram]. Some types of schemas include relational database schemas.]] > > > 94. Semantic Web Standards > > Add SPARQL. Added! > > 99. SPARQL > > The SPARQL 1.1 reference link is broken. > Fixed! > > 106. Triple > > s/a verb, or// Thanks! > > [A predicate is not necessarily a verb-like-thing, it is at least as > often an adjective-like-thing.] > I prefer the "verb-like-thing" vision of a predicate when explaining the basics of this concept, with relation to the well-known "subject - verb - complement" in natural language. > [Technically a triple is not the "smallest possible RDF graph". An RDF > graph is defined as a set of statements and the smallest set is the > empty set. But that probably sounds like splitting hairs so I don't mind > that bit staying :)] > > > 109. Turtle > > s/as,/as/ Thanks again, Dave! Cheers, Ghislain [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/glossary/index.html [2] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/bp/index.html#source-data -- Ghislain Atemezing EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department Campus SophiaTech 450, route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, 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
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 10:36:01 UTC