Re: ISSUE-66: LinkedDataT

> There's a lot of buzz around Hypermedia APIs at the moment.

“Buzz” is the right word, but I'm happy with the interest.
Good some people are actually implementing them ;-)

> Some people describe this as Linked APIs or also Linked Data
> without thinking about RDF for a second.

Mmm, I'd say that's a stretch. Haven't seen or heard this before.

I do think there's a great link between Hypermedia and the ideas of Linked Data
(or even the Linked Data principles and the REST uniform interface constraints)
because of the self-descriptiveness this brings to message.

> I have been at lots of developer conferences in the last couple of months.
> Very few people there have any Semantic Web background. Nevertheless they
> use terms like "linked data" to talk about data that contains hyperlinks.

Really? Then we definitely need to make this clear.
BTW Is there any written material that uses “Linked Data” this way?

>> I suppose I could rewrite it like that, yes!
> 
> Do others think this clarifies things?

I'll try a rewrite; can be undone if necessary.
It's sometimes just easier to see what it would look like.

>> I used to call them colloquially "subject pages";
>> I think it was Olaf who recommended me "Linked Data document".
>> 
>> Any term that's more clear is good for me.
> 
> What about "RDF representations"? Swapping section 4.1 and 4.2 might make
> this simpler as you could simply say that a (RDF) "data dump" is the union
> of all RDF "representations" of a dataset/API/whatever.

It's not really the same. SPARQL endpoints also offer RDF representations.
I mean "Linked Data documents” as the subject-based dereferencing principle.
E.g., if the subject is http://dbpedia.org/resource/Paris_Hilton,
the document you receive when using this URL in a browser
is the Linked Data document corresponding to that resource.

Best,

Ruben

Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2014 15:06:31 UTC