Re: LOD Data Sets, Licensing, and AWS

Ian Davis wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:00 AM, Kingsley Idehen 
> < <>> wrote:
>         There will be dozens or hundreds of other documents that use
>         the same URI and the owners of those datasets would like
>         attribution for their work. For example, I can make some
>         unique assertions about you that no-one else has and I would
>         like those attributed to me - using your URI would not provide
>         that attribution.
>     But your URIs conveys your point of view. The important thing here
>     is that their is a route back to your data space; the place from
>     which your point of view originates.
>     If the pathways to the origins of data are obscured we are
>     recreating yesterday's economy (imho), one in which original
>     creators of work as easily dislocated by middlemen. An economy in
>     which incentives for data publishing are minimal for those who
>     have invested time and money in quality data curation and
>     maintenance.
> I'm not talking about obscuring any pathways. I'm talking about using 
> existing URIs and adding more information. If I publish the following 
> RDF as part of a set of reviews at then 
> how, in your scheme, am I supposed to get attribution?
> < 
> <>> a foaf:weblog ;
> rev:text "Kingsley's blog, often containing pertinent lod postings" .
> Ian

Via the following statements in your own data space (assuming the review 
doesn't already include metadata that exposes author or creator URIs):

<> a foaf:Document;
foaf:primarytopic  < 
<>> ;
dc:creator <#you>.

Also note, there is implicit data provider attribution to whoever owns 
or runs <>, assuming this is an HTTP URI 
that's implicitly bound to its metadata (as per Linked Data meme).



Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog:
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web:

Received on Wednesday, 24 June 2009 13:17:59 UTC