- From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:15:48 +0100
- To: Christopher Gutteridge <cjg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
I am fine with that, but we need an approach for promoting linked data that does not interfere with existing business structures and revenue models. It's like GPL vs. LPGL - bundling a new perspective with enforcing a new business culture (as in GPL) means many businesses will rule out accepting your proposal/contribution, however valuable it may be. No major software house imports a single line of GPL code, no matter how wonderful it may be. On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:10 PM, Christopher Gutteridge wrote: > Maybe Silver Stars and Gold Stars? or just Stars for the linking and format and Gold for the license? > > On 09/03/11 21:03, Martin Hepp wrote: >> Dear Tim, all: >> >>> ★ Available on the web (whatever format), but with an open licence >>> ★★ Available as machine-readable structured data (e.g. Excel instead of image scan of a table) >>> ★★★ As (2) plus non-proprietary format (e.g. CSV instead of Excel) >>> ★★★★ All the above, plus: use open standards from W3C (RDF and SPARQL) to identify things, so that people can point at your stuff >>> ★★★★★ All the above, plus: link your data to other people’s data to provide context >> I fear that the "open" requirement as the entrance gate for the star schema means that e-commerce data will be excluded. >> >> Most providers of e-commerce data (offers, model data, images,...) will >> - want to put some constraints on the usage of their data or >> - cannot release the data under an open license because they are bound by their licensing conditions to the actual creator of the page. >> >> For example, no shop owner can grant you an open license on the product images or the advertising text of the items if this was provided by the manufacturer. Or they cannot release the product model data freely, because they often buy it from data intermediaries. >> >> It would be desirable to have standardized licenses, identified by a URI, which cater for those needs. For example, a license that says >> >> - foaf:homepage links to the human-readable page must not be removed from the page, and/or >> - foaf:page / foaf:homepage links must be shown and clickable on any human-readable rendering of the original RDF data. >> >> The URI for the license is important since checking for allowable uses of the data can be automated then. Proprietary licenses make reusing data too difficult, since evaluating the license is the new AI barrier even if the content integration is facilitated by RDF and OWL. >> >> So in a nutshell, I strongly suggest to weaken the "open license" requirement to "a license identified by a URI". Or, grant one star for each condition that is met so that such a site can get four stars. >> >> Otherwise you state that a manufacturer or shop site that obeys all linked data rules and puts out a lot of valuable data in RDF does not even deserve a single star. >> >> >> Best >> >> Martin Hepp >> >> >> >> On Mar 9, 2011, at 9:46 PM, Bill Roberts wrote: >> >>> I like the new(ish) addition to http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html on 5-star data. Unfortunately it looks like TimBL typed it with his eyes shut :-) >>> >>> Since it's a much read and much referenced document, I'd like to offer the following version with typos corrected. Perhaps someone with permission to edit this page might want to copy and paste it in. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> Is your data 5 Star? >>> >>> (Added 2010). This year, in order to encourage people - especially government data owners - along the road to good linked data, I have developed this star rating system. >>> >>> ★ Available on the web (whatever format), but with an open licence >>> ★★ Available as machine-readable structured data (e.g. Excel instead of image scan of a table) >>> ★★★ As (2) plus non-proprietary format (e.g. CSV instead of Excel) >>> ★★★★ All the above, plus: use open standards from W3C (RDF and SPARQL) to identify things, so that people can point at your stuff >>> ★★★★★ All the above, plus: link your data to other people’s data to provide context >>> >>> How well does your data do? You can buy 5 star data mugs, T-shirts and bumper stickers from the W3C shop at Cafepress: use them to get your colleagues and fellow conference-goers thinking 5 star linked data. (Profits also help W3C :-). >>> >>> Now in 2010, people have been pressing me, for government data, to add a new requirement, and that is there should be metadata about the data itself, and that that metadata should be available from a major catalog. Any open dataset (or even datasets which are not but should be open) can be registered at ckan.net. Government datasets from the UK and US should be registered at data.gov.uk or data.gov respectively. Other countries I expect to develop their own registries. Yes, there should be metadata about your dataset. That may be the subject of a new note in this series. >> > > -- > Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248 > > / Lead Developer, EPrints Project, http://eprints.org/ > / Web Projects Manager, ECS, University of Southampton, http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/ > / Webmaster, Web Science Trust, http://www.webscience.org/ >
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 21:16:18 UTC