- From: John Erickson <olyerickson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 09:24:10 -0400
- To: Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-gld-wg@w3.org" <public-gld-wg@w3.org>
I'm confused about the direction this discussion has taken. As per the action items from last week's GLD, we engaged in a discussion on the list that iterated to the following (Sandro's version) that (a) I like and (b) no one objected to in the thread: 1-star: Publish your data on the Web in any format (eg PDF or JPEG image of a table of numbers) accompanied by an explicit "open license" (expression of rights) 2-star: Publish your data in a structured, machine-readable format (eg an application's own data files, perhaps in binary or XML) 3-star: Publish your data in a documented, non-proprietary format (eg CSV, KML) 4-star: Publish an RDF (subject-property-value) view of your data (eg a Turtle file, or a SPARQL endpoint for a SQL database) 5-star: When available, use common identifiers based on working links to useful or definitive data sources (eg use <http://www.w3.org/People/Berners-Lee/card#i> as the id for Tim Berners-Lee) What is wrong with the above??? On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com> wrote: > On 23/05/13 11:24, Sandro Hawke wrote: >> >> >> -- >> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. > > > Brevity is good but ... :) > > Dave > > -- John S. Erickson, Ph.D. Director, Web Science Operations Tetherless World Constellation (RPI) <http://tw.rpi.edu> <olyerickson@gmail.com> Twitter & Skype: olyerickson
Received on Thursday, 23 May 2013 13:24:44 UTC