Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] FOAF sites offline during cleanup

On 27 Apr 2009, at 20:10, Kingsley Idehen wrote:

> Steve Harris wrote:
>> On 27 Apr 2009, at 14:26, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>>>> I would safely say re. LOD Cloud somewhere north of 80% :-) And  
>>>>> thats
>>>>> primary due to the content coming from PingTheSemanticWeb,  
>>>>> otherwise
>>>>> I would say 90% and higher. The "Linked Data" meme has always
>>>>> encouraged URIs for everything.
>>>> I guess it depends whether you count your population by triples or
>>>> graphs, but that seems quite high to me. The vast majority of FOAF
>>>> data (Hi5 and LiveJournal, for example) has bnodes in it, and FOAF
>>>> makes up the bulk of LinkedData as far as I've been able to tell.
>>> No, the FOAF data with bnodes in the LOD cloud come from the places
>>> you've just mentioned via PingTheSemanticWeb (PTSW) and other  
>>> crawler
>>> built from PTSW, or those that performed similar RDF crawling.
>> My reading of your sentence above was that you were including PTSW,  
>> and in any case if you don't not crawl how can you ever get to see  
>> a reasonable slice of the LOD?
> I was referring to the data sets in the LOD cloud bubble that we've  
> loaded into the instance at:  (which does  
> include stuff from PTSW but placed into its own Named Graph Group).  
> Think warehouse just for this conversation.

Sure, but that cloud diagram includes FOAF, and something like 99% of  
FOAF files include bNodes. I don't know  what proportion of the LOD  
web is FOAF, but it must be around 50%.

The "Linked" part of the name implies that crawling is a valid tactic  
to gather the data to me.

- Steve

Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2009 09:28:05 UTC