- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 23:33:21 +0200
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
On 6 Aug 2014 at 18:09, Ruben Verborgh wrote: >> This combination of structure and URLs is the essence of Linked Data >> What exactly do you mean by *structure* in this context? Could we simplify >> it by saying "This usage of URLs is the essence..."? Or do you think we >> would lose something if we did? > > I tried to refer back to the sentence above: > > Machines prefer structured data using unambiguous identifiers. > That closes the story about Linked Data then. > Perhaps this can be done clearer? > > Note that the structure is indeed important: > HTML pages have a lot of URLs too, but we can't do the same things. What about simply repeating it as in Such structured data with unambiguous identifiers is the essence... >> I think you've done a good job of phrasing this. > > Thanks :-) Indeed, really great work! >> Note, however, that there is a working group (CSVW) with a charter a >> "CSV file with thousands of numbers" useful as Linked Data. > > Oh great, now this thread will explode again ;-) > > On a serious note: any other example there would also work; > I just want to indicate the difference between machine-processable and > -interpretable. I think this is fine as-is as you mention the missing context explicitly: ... Most of them are written in natural language, which machines cannot understand yet. And even if a document contains machine- readable information, **the appropriate context is often missing**. For instance, what do thousands of numbers in a comma-separated file mean? AFAICT, the CSV WG is addressing this by adding such a context. Gregg, out of curiosity, is the current idea still to leverage JSON-LD contexts to do so? -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 6 August 2014 21:33:57 UTC