Re: There's No Money in Linked Data

Hi Andreas,

Thank you for the post and for the discussion. I agree with most of it.
Some specific comments

*2. Most datasets of the LOD cloud are maintained by a single person or by
nobody at all *(at least as stated on

I think this is key, may be having a tiered system like (apache? ) might
help. Datasets with one person involved, go into incubator phase? and then
later on depending on community involvement, usage, bugs/errors found they
are promoted to an advanced level? This will ensure a greater oversight and
community involvement. This might help even with the issues of quality as

*But now it’s time to clean up*:

Very crucial. It is something we have tried to point out in the past, [1]

Minor point:

*1. The LOD cloud covers mainly ‘general
in contrast to ‘domain knowledge<>

There are more domain specific datasets on LOD, Geonames, Music Brainz,
Bio2RDF (you pointed out), Lingvoj,... I think there are few DBpedia like
datasets (Freebase, and CIA Factbook). A big collection of information
about places,


[1] Linked data is merely more data P.
P. Hitzler, P.Z. Yeh, K. Verma, A.P. Sheth
*Linked Data Meets Artificial Intelligence*, 82--86, 2010



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Prateek Jain, Ph. D.
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
1101 Kitchawan Road, 37-244
Yorktown Heights, NY 10598


On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Andreas Blumauer (Semantic Web Company) <> wrote:

> Hi Prateek, hi all,
> thank you for the more precise formulation of your hypothesis.
> I've been thinking for a while what the reasons are for the low uptake of
> LOD in non-academic projects.
> Here is the outcome:
> What do you think?
> Kind Regards,
> Andreas
> ------------------------------
> Hello All,
> I am one of the authors of the work being discussed.
> All the stuff I have seen till now is about Linked Data being great and
> useful for data integration within commercial settings. The work does not
> disputes that. I agree we didn't use the proper term, and from the reading
> of the work it becomes clear we didn't complain about this aspect. The work
> will be revised to correct the terminology and other feedback from the
> mailing list.
> The issue pointed out in the work is with Linked Open Data Cloud data
> sets. This is getting limited or no attention in the discussions. Its like
> saying the technology is awesome, lets not worry so much about the 'open'
> data sets.
> In Adrea's blog he is saying technology is mature now. That is great. But
> these technologies have been around for a while now.
> The question still remains, what about the 'open' datasets amassed till
> now? The 300+ datasets which everyone uses in their slides.
> In the blog
> "Yes, there is a critical mass of available LOD sources (for example UK
> Ordnance Survey) and also of high-quality thesauri and ontologies (for
> example Wolter Kluwer’s working law thesaurus) to be reused in corporate
> settings"
> But they have been around for about 6 yrs? Why haven't they been used till
> now besides academic playgrounds or for pure research? Is it not good
> enough to be used? In the hope it will happen one day? In your blog there
> is a link for use case of Linked Data. Why don't we find same thing for
> Linked Open Data?
> (These are all questions which I have pondered about, not a criticism)
> I have tried collecting the use cases before for LOD
> The response was limited.
> Happy to see the discussion, but I think the main issue seems to be
> getting sidelined.
> Regards
> Prateek
> Note: The views expressed herein are my own and do not necessarily reflect
> the views of my co-authors of the work 'There's No Money in Linked Data'
> and my employer.
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Prateek Jain, Ph. D.
> IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
> 1101 Kitchawan Road, 37-244
> Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
> Linkedin:


Received on Friday, 7 June 2013 17:08:08 UTC