CLOSURE: Re-definition of Linked Data

Since everyone on this list isn't a subscriber to the RDF working groups 
comments list, here is what *could* be a conclusion to the recent debate 
about RDF and Linked Data, when the context of the discussion is a W3C spec.

On 6/17/13 2:51 PM, David Booth wrote:
> On 06/17/2013 01:43 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> If the W3C's RDF group is to endorseJSON-LD as a recommended concrete
>> syntax for RDF, then it is natural (and basic common sense) for said
>> workgroup to define Linked Data using the bullet points outlined in
>> TimBL's revised meme.
>
> Okay, but I am confused about the details of what you are suggesting. 
> Are you suggesting that the JSON-LD intro use the following list where 
> it describes Linked Data?
>
> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
> [[
>   1. Use URIs as names for things
>
>   2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names.
>
>   3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information, using 
> the standards (RDF*, SPARQL)
>
>   4. Include links to other URIs. so that they can discover more things.
> ]]
>
> David

I am basically saying:

The W3C workgroup rules when the matter at hand is a spec for which its 
official endorsement is sought. Thus, their definition of Linked Data 
overrules all others since they are the one's whose endorsement is being 
sought en route to public acceptance etc..

Peter has outlined this matter with crystal clarity, as far as I am 
concerned.

With regards to what you outlined above, it's up to the RDF workgroup to 
decide what they consider as a normative definition of Linked Data. For 
instance, point three makes much more sense when read in the context of 
a W3C spec since SPARQL and RDF are actual W3C standards. Thus, if you 
want to implement Linked Data, as outlined by the W3C you are best 
served using existing W3C standards.

Technical apects about point three:

It's much easier to publish Linked Data via the use of SPARQL protocol 
URLs with regards to handling Linked Data's mandatory name->address 
indirection. It's also very useful to leverage W3C's RDF standards when 
constructing this kind of structured data due to the following:

1. standardized structured data representation
2. standardized structured data representation that includes explicit 
machine- and -human comprehensible entity relationship semantics
3. standardized notations (or concrete syntaxes) for semantically 
enhanced structured data expression, serialization, and interchange.

-- 

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