- From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 20:54:38 +0200
- To: "Andreas Eberhart" <andreas.eberhart@i-u.de>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Hi Andreas, Great piece of work. A few comments : The paper (2.4) states that "RDF subjects, predicates and most objects are URLs themselves..." - errm, not! However it's interesting that you did get a good number of links using this assumption. I would suspect that there is a large number of HTML pages with linked RDF data - in fact it might be worth comparing the difference in the number of pages using the different embedding/linking techniques described in Sean Palmer's paper (URL anyone?). I'm a little confused about the crawling strategies (must reread), so apologies if you're doing this already, I would imagine that filtering sites so that outgoing links are only crawled if the current page has asssociated RDF would significantly reduce the bulk of non-RDF associated pages without removing too many good links. It would be nice to see an amalgamated vocabulary containing terms and their usage frequency (and clashes), this might also be a test of your assertion about a universal vocabulary being impossible. Cheers, Danny. --- Danny Ayers <stuff> http://www.isacat.net </stuff> Idea maps for the Semantic Web http://ideagraph.net >-----Original Message----- >From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org >[mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Andreas Eberhart >Sent: 15 August 2002 16:39 >To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org >Subject: Survey of RDF data on the Web > > > > >Dear Interest Group, > >we re-ran our RDF survey experiment, which was originally conducted in Dec. >2001 [1]. If you are interested in the results for Aug 2002 and a >comparison, please have a look at our technical report available at [2]. > >Andreas > >[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Dec/0089.html >[2] http://www.i-u.de/schools/eberhart/rdf/ > >
Received on Thursday, 15 August 2002 15:03:40 UTC