- From: Jun Zhao <jun.zhao@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 18:21:49 +0100
- To: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
- CC: public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <483EE62D.5020001@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Hello Michael, Hausenblas, Michael wrote: > Dear LODers, > > One thing we encounter recurrently when using the LOD datasets is where > to 'start best'. I'm unsure how to handle this situation, so I tried to > gather some issues along with a simple proposal how to deal with it > (called MetaLOD) at [1]. The idea basically is to develop a vocabulary > and gather information 'about' the LOD datasets, such as 'at Geonames > you get location-based information', etc. > This looks very interesting. And I desperately share your needs, i.e. looking for the data to link to. I am also thinking about rdfs:seeAlso, and something like skos:related, skos:broader or skos:narrower. A snip showing how I could use your structure to describe our data: :LODataset a rdfs:Class ; rdfs:label "a LOD dataset" . set:DBpedia a :LODataset ; owl:sameAs <http://dbpedia.org/> . set:Geonames a :LODataset ; owl:sameAs <http://sws.geonames.org/> ; foaf:topic <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Location_%28geography%29> . set:flyted a :LODataset ; owl:sameAs <http://www.fly-ted.org/sparql> ; foaf:topic <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Biology> ; foaf:topic <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Drosophila> ; foaf:topic <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Image> ; rdfs:seeAlso <http://spade.lbl.gov:2021/> ; skos;related <http://spade.lbl.gov:2021/> ; skos:narrower <http://dbpedia.org/> . What do you think? All the best, Jun > I'm aware of the fact that each LOD dataset *should* provide this kind > of information about itself, however (i) not all do AFAIK, and (ii) even > if all did, how can an application determine effectively and efficiently > which LOD dataset might be good to use for a certain task? I don't want > to propose a 'centrally controlled registry' with this idea, just a way > to flag what to expect from a LOD dataset as a kind of jump start. > > A formal description of the LOD dataset would also be beneficial for > other exploration purposes, I guess. For example we could express access > options for a LOD dataset (dump, SPARQL endpoint, etc.) or QoS > information, even trust issues or (user) ratings might be of interest. > > Any thoughts? > > While I'm here: In case you're around at ESWC08, come and join us at the > LOD gathering [2] > > Cheers, > Michael > > [1] http://community.linkeddata.org/MediaWiki/index.php?MetaLOD > [2] > http://esw.w3.org/topic/SweoIG/TaskForces/CommunityProjects/LinkingOpenD > ata/TenerifeGathering > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Michael Hausenblas, MSc. > Institute of Information Systems & Information Management > JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH > Steyrergasse 17, A-8010 Graz, AUSTRIA > > <office> > phone: +43-316-876-1193 (fax:-1191) > mobile: +43-699-1876-1165 > e-mail: michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at > skype: mhausenblas > web: http://www.joanneum.at/iis/ > > <see also> > http://sw-app.org/about.html > http://riese.joanneum.at > ---------------------------------------------------------- > >
Received on Thursday, 29 May 2008 17:22:28 UTC