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

On 6/11/13 4:51 PM, David Booth 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". 

That isn't my point.

My point is that the document provides a nice guideline for moving folks 
towards Linked Data. It does so without putting RDF at the front-door.

Again, I am not debating the virtues of RDF. My profound difference with 
you simply boils down to not seeing the need to inextricably link RDF 
and Linked Data, at every turn. I have no interest in adding inertia to 
engagement endeavors when the target audience has no interest in the 
letters R-D-F. I care much more about the underlying concepts and their 
utility than I do  labels.

I am not interested in proving any point or winning any wars around the 
letters R-D-F. I encourage you to consider doing the same thing. The 
world fully exploiting the power of the Web is an endeavor achievable 
without RDF at the front-door.

Note: not having RDF at the front-door in now way renders it useless or 
irrelevant.

> Think about it.

I have, for many many years, which is why I am still investing so much 
time on this subject matter.

> Would it make any sense to call a PDF document "Linked Data" just 
> because it is on the web with an open license? 

No comment.

> Of course not. 

Thank you.

> But it would qualify for one star on the path *toward* Linked Open Data.

A Paper Description Format (what PDF is to me) has nothing to do with 
any kind of openly accessible data, modulo the increasing existence of 
extractor and conversion tools.


Kingsley
>
>>
>> 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
>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen