Linked Data and the Original Web Proposal

All,

I've taken the time to embellish TimBL's original WWW proposal 
illustration with Linked Data URIs [1].

Why?

Because, it seems to be unclear (to many) if the original WWW design had 
Linked Data in mind all along.

My claim and long standing position:

The original WWW design always had Linked Data in mind, and the proof 
lies in the presence of fundamental Linked Data characteristics which 
come to life once you turn the literal relation names (denotations) into 
HTTP URIs, without cluttering the diagram.

Remember, the rules for Linked Data publication are:

1. use URIs to name (denote) entities (things)
2. use HTTP URIs so that names can be looked-up (i.e, by HTTP URI 
de-reference)
3. provide useful information when HTTP URIs are looked up -- basically, 
this is where industry standards for data representation and access come 
into play (e.g., RDF and SPARQL, respectively)
4. also refer to other entities (things) using their URIs as part of the 
information you provide in #3.

The WWW proposal diagram shows an collection of entities related is a 
variety of ways i.e., the links/relations are typed. Basically you have 
a relations property hierarchy where "linksTo" or "connectedTo" sits at 
the top with "describes", "includes", "refers to" are sub properties. 
Writing this all up in Turtle should be pretty obvious, and If need be 
I'll even do that too.

Conclusion:

The point here is not to create and endless permathread. The simple goal 
is to be crystal clear about Linked Data, the World Wide Web, and 
eventually RDF.

I am singling out RDF at this point because lost in many of the 
fragmented threads is the fact that I am yet to have any respond with a 
clear lits of characteristics that are unique to RDF i.e., what makes a 
document distinctly RDF and nothing but that?

The fact that I claim that RDF distinguishing features haven't been 
presented so far in no way implies:

1. that they don't exist
2. that this is some quest to replace RDF.

There is only one quest here, and that is to be crystal clear about 
Linked Data while also being crystal clear about RDF. They both deserve 
clarity since conflating them remains eternally detrimental to both. 
Even worse, it just pushes the same old permathreads into the future.


Links:

1. http://bit.ly/1aIiD0L -- directory browsing view exposing the image 
mapped HTML doc, jpeg, and OmniGraffle source file.
2. http://bit.ly/16v8fpR -- original WWW proposal diagram enhanced with 
actual live HTTP URIs (most resolve to documents that describe the URI's 
referent) .


-- 

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