- From: Joe Presbrey <presbrey@csail.mit.edu>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 11:54:24 -0400
- To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Cc: public-lod@w3.org
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > Facebook have released structured data in graph form. They've done so in the > Information Space dimension and its absolutely a great contribution. > > owl:shameAs is really about saying: I've made a URI for an object in your > data space, and I am exploiting its inherent SDQ at your expense. The > "shame" (tongue in check) comes from fact that said entity more than likely > hasn't made a Linked Data URI because they are waiting for a concrete > business case etc.. In a sense, its about saying: I am eating your lunch and > here's how. Thus, use the Name I've minted, and at the very least you'll > reduce business model erosion etc.. > > Again: owl:shameAs is old humor (from me) about Linked Data granularity, > business models, opportunity costs, and lunch. Don't take owl:shameAs > literally :-) Thanks for clarifying however eating Facebook's lunch and minting URIs that append #this is still not the best recommendation. URIs under a new domain, perhaps (rdf|fql|sparql).facebook.com, should be used to clearly distinguish the RDF endpoint from their JSON/graph interface. I would like to see them add RDFa/microdata, but they have already done quite a bit of work against frontend mechanization so I doubt that will happen anytime soon.
Received on Monday, 20 June 2011 15:55:19 UTC