W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2009

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

From: Steve Harris <steve.harris@garlik.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:45:33 +0100
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, foaf-dev Friend of a <foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org>
Message-Id: <2F9E3F0F-C162-45CE-97FD-3C88ABEC21E9@garlik.com>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
On 29 Apr 2009, at 14:06, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> Steve,
> If we isolate the "FOAF Profiles" bubble of the LOD-Cloud pictorial,  
> would you say these sources are representative:
> 1. http://esw.w3.org/topic/FoafSites
> 2. http://pingthesemanticweb.com
> 3. http://sindice.com

It seems highly unlikely.

The only way to get a representative sample is to select some of the  
data randomly. ESW links a human-curated selection of sites, PTSW gets  
fed similarly similarly and Sindice crawled, IIUC.

I don't think anyone even has a good idea of how many FOAF files are  
out there, to know if they have a good selection or not. I think we  
have 12 million or so unique ones, but we know there's an awful lot  
more out there.

Ontop of that, "FOAF" is especially vague, eg. do qdos.com profiles  
(eg. http://qdos.com/user/Steve-Harris/18b6f60b41e05aaa418565ebfe901d6b/turtle) 
  count as FOAF profiles? They have foaf:People in them, and use one  
or two foaf properties, but foaf: is not the most common prefix.

What about DOAP files with lots of FOAF in them? Some use foaf: more  
than doap:, and so on.

- Steve
Received on Wednesday, 29 April 2009 13:46:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:11 UTC