- From: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:02:19 +0100
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
In message <4C41869E.2040703@webr3.org>, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> writes > >Thus, in addition to nudging at general awareness of these issues, I do >wonder who (if anybody) is working on spam (and unethical usage) >solutions for the web of data? A brave choice of subject line. If it hadn't been from you (and how was I know to it really was?) I would have deleted it unread in my e-mail-previewing program (AKA my post-spam-filter-filter). I think the answer is that we are wide open to this, especially with data at the "simple triples" level. I was thinking just yesterday about how museums might publish their collections objects as Linked Data.[1] If they were to follow the dbpedia model, and publish a set of [unrelated] triples with the object identifier as subject, embedded in their web page for the object, there is nothing to stop someone else putting out a page containing lies about that object, also expressed as simple triples with the object URL as subject. By the time Google has indexed both those pages "semantically" (see yesterday's acquisition of FreeBase) and merged the results in its uber-index, you won't know the difference. Not a likely scenario for museum objects, I guess, but very much a possibility for commercially-sensitive and personal information. In our domain, this is why the Europeana Data Model[2] adopts e.g. the ORE Proxy [3] concept to specifically label a set of assertions as coming from a known resource. Richard [1] http://museum-api.pbworks.com/Sample%20NMSI%20objects%20as% 20Linked%20Data [be kind, LD gurus!] [2] http://version1.europeana.eu/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=9783319c-90 49-436c-bdf9-25f72e85e34c&groupId=10602 [3] http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/Proxy -- Richard Light
Received on Saturday, 17 July 2010 11:04:11 UTC