Re: Request for pre-review of Linked Data Glossary

Hi James,
Thanks for your feedback.  Here is my understanding of some points you raise in order of the issues you reference, not glossary number.

1) The MS Excel format is proprietary and thus doesn't count as 3 star LD.  The Office Open XML is a file format developed by MS, and has gone through a standardization effort however, that is a representation of the proprietary Excel file format. Thus, it would be 2 star data on the 5-star scale.

RE: ad for linked data mug - I appreciate your sentiment and have moved to be a link only, no image.

2) 5 Star Linked Data Diagram

The diagram is pretty widely used in presentations.  Perhaps not as popular as the "classic LOD cloud", [1] it is worth a mention.  Also, the GLD WG (prior to your joining) discussed the desire to have more LD collateral that people could use for briefing stakeholders on why LD matters.  This entry is one intended to help address that issue.  

3) CKAN

Removed.  

We have a LD community directory [that is being revamped at present], that will be the appropriate spot to add projects, products and services from vendors, regardless of affiliation with the W3C.

4) curl

Thank you for that clarification. Your proposed change is being added.

5) Data Cloud

Thank you for pointing that out & apologies that there are typos :-(  Fixed.

Please keep reading.  Again, thanks for your feedback -- very helpful.


Cheers,

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


[1] http://lod-cloud.net/

On Mar 18, 2013, at 5:50 PM, James McKinney <james@opennorth.ca> wrote:

> 1. 5 Star Linked Data
> 
> Isn't the format used by Microsoft Excel no longer proprietary? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML
> 
> It's also a bit jarring to find an advertisement for the linked data mug after the first item in the glossary.
> 
> 2. 5 Star Linked Data Diagram
> 
> I would merge this in with "5 Star Linked Data". I'd never heard of the diagram, and I'm not sure there really is one canonical diagram.
> 
> 8. CKAN
> 
> If we are going to list CKAN, should we not list others like Socrata? I would opt to not include any specific vendor.
> 
> 16. curl
> 
> curl can retrieve any data over a wide variety of protocols, not just machine readable content. The example here is inappropriate. It should appear under the definition for 55. Machine Readable Data. If that's done, remove the link to "curl" from 25. DBPedia.
> 
> 21. Data Cloud
> 
> "directoies" typo
> 
> OK, read the first 25 for now.
> 
> James
> 
> On 2013-03-18, at 5:34 PM, 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
>

Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 13:50:58 UTC