- From: Joshua Lieberman <jlieberman@tumblingwalls.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 14:38:22 -0400
- To: janowicz@ucsb.edu
- Cc: public-sdw-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <A465E730-164B-4804-A8D6-4DAE09ADCA18@tumblingwalls.com>
Exactly some of the issues to work out. For example, it could start to be a condition of using someone’s data to send back a link to the new data (product) in return. Or there could be a role for 3rd parties to support the links (a more generalized version of populating the web with owl:SameAs triples). It has the potential, however, to make the Web of Data much more easily navigable. -Josh > On Aug 5, 2015, at 2:31 PM, Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu> wrote: > > Personally, I would be careful about the back-linking as this has many implications on LinkedData as an infrastructure. Where would such back links be stored, can I filter them by source, etc? > > Best, > Krzysztof > > > On 08/05/2015 08:32 AM, Joshua Lieberman wrote: >> We are having to deal with some confusion over spatial specialness because many important capabilities for spatial data also have conceivable usefulness for other data. The difference is often one of centrality. Spatial data “always” deals with features, the basis of defining what the data represents. It is usually valuable and often essential for working with distributed spatial data to be able to identify where features and/or geometries are being shared, e.g. links to all the data that characterize not just more or less the same location but the same feature such as a hill or an aquifer. The reference back to a shared feature or perhaps a shared observation concerning a feature is an important constraint on the relationships between forward-linked data elements as well as their mutual validity. For example, suppose there exist 5 datasets describing the bus arrivals for the same bus stop. It would raise questions if those times did not agree. We would only know that by being able to find multiple arrival datasets linked from the bus stop feature. Links are needed both from and to related data in some fashion in order to enable “crawlability" as well as to answer both directional questions, i.e. what data was this data derived from (provenance) and what other data is making use of this data (usage). >> >> >> It is conceivable that someone might want to follow all the links to data that show a temperature of “9” or a color of “blue” but those are arguably not central to use of distributed data in general. While there are some other capabilities that should be considered general data-on-the-web issues, It makes sense to me in this case for the SDWWG to take the lead in recommending this capability and let others then look at generalizing this to non-spatial data. >> >> Josh >> >> Joshua Lieberman, Ph.D. >> Principal >> Tumbling Walls >> jlieberman*tumblingwalls.com <http://tumblingwalls.com/> >> +1 617 431 6431 >> >>> On Aug 5, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com <mailto:bill@swirrl.com>> wrote: >>> >>> I don't have a strong feeling about this and agree it is a more general problem than just spatial. We could perhaps identify a good solution, perhaps one from another domain, and list this in our best practices. Maybe the data on the web group has something to say on the issue? >>> >>> >>> >>> On 5 Aug 2015, at 15:53, Kerry Taylor <Kerry.Taylor@acm.org <mailto:Kerry.Taylor@acm.org>> wrote: >>> >>>> frans, >>>> I suppose because the "linking", including "backlinks" , is a major( the major?) reason for our existence....and a serious missing element in existing standards for spatial data publishing/ consuming. Does that argument stand up? >>>> Kerry >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6 Aug 2015, at 12:38 am, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl <mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2015-08-05 16:08 GMT+02:00 Kerry Taylor <Kerry.Taylor@acm.org <mailto:Kerry.Taylor@acm.org>>: >>>>> Bill, >>>>> This seems to me to be a use case we need, that is kind-of there in a few use cases but not so explicit as you have described it here ( although you have included some solution suggestions). Can you put it on the use case page on the wiki as a starting point to processing it further? >>>>> @Frans, @Alejandro, would that be appropriate? >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I think it would. >>>>> >>>>> This is not really specific to "spatial" linking but I do think it is something we should specifically address nevertheless... >>>>> >>>>> That was my initial thought too: backlinking is an understandable requirement, but I don't see how it fits within our scope. Why do you think we should address it nevertheless? It would be nice if we can discover the spatialness of the matter. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Frans >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kerry >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 5 Aug 2015, at 10:32 pm, Bill Roberts <bill@swirrl.com <mailto:bill@swirrl.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all >>>>>> >>>>>> In last week's call I mentioned a use case for 'back links' to places - the question of what resources are linked to my location of interest, or in RDF terminology, which triples exist with my location as the object. Something that comes up frequently in our work for local government is 'area profiles' - selecting and presenting data about a place. The data typically covers topics like demographics, health, economy, environment etc. and in our work is usually represented as statistical data in linked data form, using the RDF Data Cube vocabulary. The RDF links generally go from an 'observation' to the place. >>>>>> >>>>>> The area profile usually this incorporates some kind of simple map of the place, plus simple charts of selected data. See http://profiles.hampshirehub.net/profiles/E06000045 <http://profiles.hampshirehub.net/profiles/E06000045> for an example >>>>>> >>>>>> This is straightforward in principle if all the available data is in a single database - you can retrieve the things you want by SPARQL query. A more general and challenging problem is to answer a user question along the lines of 'what data is available about location X' drawing from distributed data sources. A practical solution to that would generally involve some manual discovery and integration - becoming aware through various means of the existence of a relevant data collection (by web search, or personal recommendation, or social media or whatever), deciding if it holds info about a place then adding it to a list of services that could be queried to pull back the data. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sometimes this could be more complicated if we are interested not only in data that links directly to our place identifier, but to related identifiers (other names for same thing, a sub-area or super-area of the place in question etc). >>>>>> >>>>>> The challenge in question is one of discovery. The most practical solution might be 'just google it' (having allowed search engines to crawl the data collections). Perhaps more targeted indexes for specific domains of interest could meet the same need with less noise. Querying metadata of data catalogues might be another option. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards >>>>>> >>>>>> Bill >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Frans Knibbe >>>>> Geodan >>>>> President Kennedylaan 1 >>>>> 1079 MB Amsterdam (NL) >>>>> >>>>> T +31 (0)20 - 5711 347 >>>>> E frans.knibbe@geodan.nl <mailto:frans.knibbe@geodan.nl> >>>>> www.geodan.nl <http://www.geodan.nl/> >>>>> disclaimer <http://www.geodan.nl/disclaimer> >>>>> >> > > > -- > Krzysztof Janowicz > > Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara > 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 > > Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu <mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu> > Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ <http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/> > Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net <http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/>
Received on Wednesday, 5 August 2015 18:38:54 UTC