- From: Peter Parslow via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 16:19:34 +0000
- To: public-sdwig@w3.org
This from the relevant strategic product manager: - We have no evidence of customer interest in traditional Linked Data formats, technologies and access patterns - We intend to utilise new OGC API standards to provide transactional access to our data, and focusing on easy to use formats such as GeoJSON, Geopackage, CSV etc – rather than things like RDF - Our experience of customer asks tends to be – just give me access to the data rather than send me across various different places / web sites to get different bits of the data" Alongside that I would say: - retaining URLs persistently is a major organisational challenge. We have managed to keep these OS ones for more than a decade, which is pretty good going - managing links out from data to other organisation's data (that may or may not be that well governed) _at scale_ (i.e. for national datasets of millions of spatial things) is a very expensive activity. We are considering managing 'link sets' as separate assets, but personally I'm not sure that helps.\ - in support of my colleagues third point, back when the 'traditional' 'linked data' pattern was popular in the UK, a surprising number of expert organisations still downloaded the whole lot rather than having to constantly dereference URLs across the web. The web was not - and still often is not - reliable enough to really support line-of-business work if designed to depend on hundreds to tens-of-thousands of HTTP GETs (I reckon people would guess "oldskeptic" might be me!) -- GitHub Notification of comment by PeterParslow Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1328#issuecomment-1020277213 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Monday, 24 January 2022 16:19:35 UTC