- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:08:45 -0500
- To: nathan@webr3.org
- CC: public-lod@w3.org
On 1/13/11 6:43 AM, Nathan wrote: > The "data" part of "linked data" is not generic, machine accessible != > machine understandable, and that's what this is all about. > > "linked data" is not some term for data with links, it's an engineered > protocol which has constraints and requirements to make the whole > thing work. Then it should be: Linked Structured Data :-) Then we stimulate the following sense: machine readable data that's defined and constrained by a schema. > > We cannot build a web of data (machine understandable dereferencable > data) without these constraints. Yes, but the moniker has to be clear enough to stimulate the right senses. If "Structure" matters, it has to be part of the moniker, otherwise, we have a grey area (which is the case today) that's best resolved via transformation handled on the client side inline, with its particular "senses" etc.. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President& CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 16:09:13 UTC