Re: Benifit of Schema.org over linked data or vice versa

On 6/2/14 3:53 PM, Lloyd Fassett wrote:
> It's a really interesting question to me.  I get the feeling that 
> Schema.org is for publishing for search engines.  Linked Data on the 
> other hand is more capable of enabling more interaction and re-use of 
> data between different applications.
>
> Linked Data could enable a stand alone application as well, where it 
> wouldn't make sense to do that with Schema.org.
>
> Is that about right?

Long story short, they are complimentary i.e., mutually inclusive :-)


Kingsley
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lloyd Fassett
> Azteria, Inc.
> Bend, OR
>
> Lloyd Fassett
> Azteria Inc.
> Bend, OR
> (541) 848-2440 (PST)
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Kingsley Idehen 
> <kidehen@openlinksw.com <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 6/2/14 9:40 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>         When TimBL originally wrote
>         http://www.w3.org/designissues/linkeddata.html  it was largely a
>         response to the indirect linking model we'd been using in the FOAF
>         project.
>
>
>     Dan,
>
>     I wouldn't say using HTTP URIs for unambiguous denotation of
>     entities was a response to FOAF. It just so happened that FOAF
>     provided a nice anecdote [1] for making the point. It's hard to
>     explain why "You" need an HTTP URI that denotes "You"
>     unambiguously if there's nothing in place to support and
>     demonstrate the utility of a common practice in the real-world
>     that's simply being exploitable via the Web medium.
>
>     As you know, unambiguous HTTP URI based entity denotation dates
>     back to the very notion of a World Wide Web  (on Paper and inside
>     TimBL's head) [2][3] :-)
>
>     How all of this got lost I will never know, but I do challenge
>     anyone to image the real-world without:
>
>     1. words -- that denoted things unambiguously
>     2. terms -- that denoted things unambiguously
>     3. sentences comprised of ambiguous words
>     4. statements comprised of ambiguous terms.
>
>     If RDF had been promoted (from the onset) as a Language rather
>     than a Format (specifically RDF/XML) we wouldn't still be
>     deliberating these matters circa., 2014.
>
>     Links:
>
>     [1] http://bit.ly/1tBFW2Q -- Get Yourself a URI post by TimBL
>
>     [2] http://bit.ly/1aNuWca -- original WWW proposal (this couldn't
>     include live HTTP URIs since the Web was at the proposal stage)
>
>     [3] http://bit.ly/10Y9FL1 -- original WWW proposal embellished
>     with live HTTP URIs that denote entities.
>
>
>     -- 
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Kingsley Idehen
>     Founder & CEO
>     OpenLink Software
>     Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>     Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>     <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>     Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
>     Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
>     LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 

Regards,

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