Re: Linked Stuff [was Re: RDF's challenge]

On 11 June 2013 22:51, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:

> On 06/11/2013 04:20 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
>> On 6/11/13 4:12 PM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     This is the goal of the Semantic Web: to enable machines to
>>>     usefully and (semi-)automatically, find, share, combine and
>>>     process web data. Because Linked Data is RDF, Linked Data supports
>>>     that goal in a very important way that Linked Stuff does not.
>>>
>>>
>>> We already have the 5 stars of linked data.  If you use RDF you're
>>> probably 5 star.  If you dont you're probably 4 star or lower.  That
>>> said, there may be some other linked data system one day become a 5
>>> star standard.
>>>
>>
> The stars are to encourage people *toward* Linked Open Data -- both Linked
> Data and fully Open Data.  The stars do *not* indicate that there is such a
> thing as "one-star Linked Data" or "four-star Linked Data". Think about it.
>  Would it make any sense to call a PDF document "Linked Data" just because
> it is on the web with an open license?  Of course not.  But it would
> qualify for one star on the path *toward* Linked Open Data.


Why would a PDF not qualify as linked data?  PDFs can have linked in them.
The format is a pain, that's why they only get 1 star.


>
>
>
>> Great point!
>>
>> The 5-Star Open Data system [1] is a nice approach to framing this most
>> challenging of narratives. It's greatest virtue is not putting RDF at
>> the front-door :-)
>>
>>
>> Links:
>>
>> 1. http://5stardata.info/ -- 5-Start Open Data
>>
>
> That is *Open* Data -- not *Linked* Data.  When you reach all five stars
> it becomes both: Linked Open Data.
>
> David
>
>