Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Melvin Carvalho]

On 28 June 2013 18:01, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:

> Hi Melvin,
> Thanks. May I ask you to provide definitions for each of the proposed
> terms please?  TIA.  I believe we'll be able to update assuming the GLD WG
> extension is approved.
>

The most normative definitions I found are:

http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#FunctionalProperty-def

4.3.1 owl:FunctionalProperty

A functional property is a property that can have only one (unique) value y
for each instance x, i.e. there cannot be two distinct values y1 and y2
such that the pairs (x,y1) and (x,y2) are both instances of this property.
Both object properties and datatype properties can be declared as
"functional". For this purpose, OWL defines the built-in class
owl:FunctionalProperty as a special subclass of the RDF class rdf:Property.

4.3.2 owl:InverseFunctionalProperty

If a property is declared to be inverse-functional, then the object of a
property statement uniquely determines the subject (some individual). More
formally, if we state that P is an owl:InverseFunctionalProperty, then this
asserts that a value y can only be the value of P for a single instance x,
i.e. there cannot be two distinct instances x1 and x2 such that both pairs
(x1,y) and (x2,y) are instances of P.

Although as someone has pointed out, this might be a little too OWL specific


>
> Cheers,
>
> Bernadette
>
> On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:31 PM, Melvin Carvalho 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 27 June 2013 17:08, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
>> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
>> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>>
>> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms
>> defined and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies
>> and best practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>>
>> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
>> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
>> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
>> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
>> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>>
>> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
>> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
>> Data,
>> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
>> Linked Data Working Group  with special
>> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
>> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
>> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
>> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
>> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
>> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
>> list, please accept our apologies.
>>
>
> Looks awesome, well done!  I was actually asked for something like this
> already this month.
>
> Would there be any possibility to add two more, which come up a bit:
>
> FP -- Functional Property
> IFP -- Inverse Functional Property
>
>
>>
>> Thank you one & all!
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Bernadette 
>> Hyland,
>> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
>> Atemezing,
>> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
>> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
>> IBM
>>
>> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
>> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>>
>
>
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Hugh Glaser]

Well done with this - a great resource.

Well no-one seems to have had a go at making it Linked Data, so I have had a 
go, using a site I have been playing with for a bit.
(The other things there are of varying quality, although 
http://codelist.org/httpstatus/ is OKish.)

It's at
http://codelist.org/ld/glossary/
with a typical URI: http://codelist.org/ld/glossary/id/114
So quite a lot of questions about what might be wanted.
It isn't straightforward, which is a bit disappointing for a list about Linked 
Data:
I have tried to stick with what was in the page as much as possible for the 
moment.
So for example, the main IDs are the numeric identifiers - should these be used?
And I have split the descriptions - I think that was sort of intended.
the See xxx also get their own entries, which seems strange.
I haven't put any seeAlso in - the see alsos are still in the text.
I did a bit of sameAs to dbpedia.

But there is a start there, and I would be happy to get any feedback about 
whether this is worth it and suggestions for improvements.

Also:

I was a bit surprised to find things like Sindice and other specific services 
in there, but it all seems useful.
However, if they are useful, would it not also be useful to have sameas.org?

And:

A few things about the web page I noticed and remembered to write down:
Sometimes there is a space or a period in an anchor.
Target is "blank" (no _) in 55, 93
I think 67 is missing the target.
91 missing ]

Best
Hugh

On 28 Jun 2013, at 16:40, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:

> Hi Bernard,
> Yes, the GLD WG discussed but at the time we said we wanted to prioritize 
> getting the HTML version out before our charter ended.   Now that it done, it 
> is easy to produce a version as LOD using SKOS.  I'll suggest it to the newly 
> formed Open Data Directory Community Group as we can easily publish the 
> glossary as LOD on w3.org namespace. If people agree, I'll commit to doing it 
> in July.  
> 
> Once published as LOD, I encourage others to take it & extend it as they see 
> useful.  Thanks for the suggestion.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bernadette Hyland
> CEO, 3 Round Stones, Inc.
> 
> Skype. BernHyland
> Main. +1-877-290-2127
> http://3roundstones.com
> @3RoundStones
> 
> Linked Data Specialists
> 
> 
> On Jun 27, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Bernard Vatant  
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Bernadette
>> 
>> Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In SKOS 
>> for example :)
>> 
>> Bernard
>> 
>> Bernard Vatant
>> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
>> Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
>> Skype : bernard.vatant
>> Blog : the wheel and the hub
>> Linked Open Vocabularies : lov.okfn.org 
>> 
>> Mondeca 
>> 3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France
>> www.mondeca.com
>> Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews
>> --
>> Meet us during the European Open Data Week in Marseille (June 25-28)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 2013/6/27 Bernadette Hyland 
>> Hi,
>> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the 
>> peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note 
>> effective 27-June-2013.[1]  
>> 
>> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined 
>> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best 
>> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.  
>> 
>> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions between 
>> the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us appreciate 
>> the application of different technologies for different use cases.  We hope 
>> the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your discussions about 
>> data sharing on the Web.
>> 
>> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the initial 
>> glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011). The editors 
>> wish to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working Group with 
>> special thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley 
>> Beeman, Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt 
>> Kaempgen, James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds 
>> who diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a 
>> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of 
>> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this 
>> list, please accept our apologies. 
>> 
>> Thank you one & all!
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> Bernadette Hyland, 3 Round Stones
>> Ghislain Atemezing, EURECOM
>> Michael Pendleton, US Environmental Protection Agency
>> Biplav Srivastava, IBM
>> 
>> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
>> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>> 
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>> 
> 

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Niklas Lindström]

I agree, this is a good reference document!

How about adding RDFa markup to turn the actual HTML Note into Linked Data?
Depending on how you've edited the source, it could just take a couple of
minutes. I just had a go with the HTML source, and got the bulk right.

Detailed edits (or for non-developers, illegible gibberish):

curl http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/ -o ld-glossary.html
vim -es ld-glossary.html <<-EOF
%s/\(\_..*\d\+\. <\/span>\)\([^<]\+\)/s!!\1\2" rev="skos:inScheme"
resource="#\2" typeof="skos:Concept">\3\4! | let s=@/ | put ='' | +1s//' | let @/=s | put! =''
%s/See https://github.com/niklasl/rdfa-lab/wiki/RDFa-CSS




On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:

> Hi Bernard,
> Yes, the GLD WG discussed but at the time we said we wanted to prioritize
> getting the HTML version out before our charter ended.   Now that it done,
> it is easy to produce a version as LOD using SKOS.  I'll suggest it to the
> newly formed Open Data Directory Community Group as we can easily publish
> the glossary as LOD on w3.org namespace. If people agree, I'll commit to
> doing it in July.
>
> Once published as LOD, I encourage others to take it & extend it as they
> see useful.  Thanks for the suggestion.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bernadette Hyland
> CEO, 3 Round Stones, Inc.
>
> *Skype. BernHyland*
> *Main. +1-877-290-2127
> http://3roundstones.com
> @3RoundStones
>
> Linked Data Specialists
> *
>
> On Jun 27, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Bernard Vatant 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Bernadette
>
> Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In
> SKOS for example :)
>
> Bernard
>
> *Bernard Vatant
> *
> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
> Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
>  Skype : bernard.vatant
> Blog : the wheel and the hub 
> Linked Open Vocabularies : lov.okfn.org
> 
> *Mondeca**  **   *
> 3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France
> www.mondeca.com
> Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews 
> --
> Meet us during the European Open Data Week  in
> Marseille (June 25-28)
>
>
>
>
> 2013/6/27 Bernadette Hyland 
>
>> Hi,
>> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
>> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
>> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>>
>> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms
>> defined and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies
>> and best practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>>
>> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
>> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
>> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
>> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
>> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>>
>> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
>> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
>> Data,
>> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
>> Linked Data Working Group  with special
>> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
>> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
>> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
>> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
>> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
>> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
>> list, please accept our apologies.
>>
>> Thank you one & all!
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Bernadette 
>> Hyland,
>> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
>> Atemezing,
>> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
>> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
>> IBM
>>
>> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
>> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>>
>
>
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Gannon Dick]

Oops. http://www.rustprivacy.org/2013/egov/catalog/DataDotGovMetaTagSoup.html
 
should be MetaTagSoup
 


 From: Gannon Dick 
To: Michael Miller ; KANZAKI Masahide 
; John Erickson  
Cc: Bernadette Hyland ; W3C public GLD WG WG 
; Linked Data community ; egov-ig 
mailing list ; HCLS  
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!
  


I agree Michael, but if you'll excuse the expression, I think we are arguing 
semantics.
 
Datasets often have domain specific names for meta data components.
 
For example, Data Dot Gov has ~44 terms-of-art.  They are to organizational 
outsiders, tag soup, to organizational insiders they are a flexible ontology 
looking thingy (you have to squint).
 
http://www.rustprivacy.org/2013/egov/catalog/DataDotGovMetaTagSoup.html
 
(directions: push the button)
 
  A URI is a right directed graph, the left-most component of which is a 
transport protocol but it is also the root node of XML documents (a destination 
Port) - below and to the right they speak the domain's language.
 


 From: Michael Miller 
To: KANZAKI Masahide ; John Erickson 
 
Cc: Bernadette Hyland ; W3C public GLD WG WG 
; Linked Data community ; egov-ig 
mailing list ; HCLS  
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 10:23 AM
Subject: RE: Linked Data Glossary is published!
  


hi all, 
 
XML takes on many levels of machine readability.  i would argue that if XML 
came with an DTD/XML schema it is at least 3 star and possibly 4 star.  that at 
least was my experience with MAGE- ML (i'd say 3 star) and the clinical XML for 
the TCGA project (4 star) 
 
cheers, 
michael
  
Michael Miller
Software Engineer 
Institute for Systems Biology
  
 
From:KANZAKI Masahide [mailto:mkanz...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 7:19 PM
To: John Erickson
Cc: Bernadette Hyland; W3C public GLD WG WG; Linked Data community; egov-ig 
mailing list; HCLS
Subject: Re: Linked Data Glossary is published! 

Hello John, thanks for reply, very much appreciated.

2013/7/2 John Erickson  
Thus, I think we should distinguish between "plain old XML" and Office
Open XML/OOXML/OpenXML; based on my understanding and what I read <>
OpenXML could be listed as an example three-star format. 


Well, that's true. I hope this distinction will be incorporated into this 
glossary, rather simply showing "XML" as 2-stars example (which is misleading 
not only for me, but also for others around me). 


* I think the POINT is that the data should be published in a way
>suited for machine consumption. A format should NOT be considered
>"machine readable" simply because someone cooked up a hack on
>Scraperwiki for getting the data out of an otherwise opaque data dump
>on a site

Yes, it is desirable that data is published for machine "consumption" in Linked 
Data space, though my point was that the term "Machine Readable" is too general 
to be redefined for LD perspective.  


* The argument against having a separate term is simply that
>(arguably) the common case for publishing "machine readable" data *is*
>structured data, and adding the a special "structured" category merely
>confuses adopters.
>* The argument for a new term is, if the reason we want "machine
>readable data" is because we expect (and usually get) structured data,
>then we should specify that what we REALLY want is "machine readable
>structured data..." (and explain what that means)

Well, "machine readable" data is *not necessarily* structured in general, so 
the second argument seems more reasonable, although I'm not arguing to add 
separate term, rather, thinking it is not good idea to redefine term "machine 
readable" just for a specific community. 


Thank you very much for the discussion.

cheers, 


-- 
@prefix : <http://www.kanzaki.com/ns/sig> . <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanz...@gmail.com"]. 

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Gannon Dick]

I agree Michael, but if you'll excuse the expression, I think we are arguing 
semantics.
 
Datasets often have domain specific names for meta data components.
 
For example, Data Dot Gov has ~44 terms-of-art.  They are to organizational 
outsiders, tag soup, to organizational insiders they are a flexible ontology 
looking thingy (you have to squint).
 
http://www.rustprivacy.org/2013/egov/catalog/DataDotGovTagSoup.html
 
(directions: push the button)
 
  A URI is a right directed graph, the left-most component of which is a 
transport protocol but it is also the root node of XML documents (a destination 
Port) - below and to the right they speak the domain's language.
 


 From: Michael Miller 
To: KANZAKI Masahide ; John Erickson 
 
Cc: Bernadette Hyland ; W3C public GLD WG WG 
; Linked Data community ; egov-ig 
mailing list ; HCLS  
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 10:23 AM
Subject: RE: Linked Data Glossary is published!
  


hi all, 
 
XML takes on many levels of machine readability.  i would argue that if XML 
came with an DTD/XML schema it is at least 3 star and possibly 4 star.  that at 
least was my experience with MAGE- ML (i'd say 3 star) and the clinical XML for 
the TCGA project (4 star) 
 
cheers, 
michael
  
Michael Miller
Software Engineer 
Institute for Systems Biology
  
 
From:KANZAKI Masahide [mailto:mkanz...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 7:19 PM
To: John Erickson
Cc: Bernadette Hyland; W3C public GLD WG WG; Linked Data community; egov-ig 
mailing list; HCLS
Subject: Re: Linked Data Glossary is published! 
 
Hello John, thanks for reply, very much appreciated.
 
2013/7/2 John Erickson  
Thus, I think we should distinguish between "plain old XML" and Office
Open XML/OOXML/OpenXML; based on my understanding and what I read <>
OpenXML could be listed as an example three-star format. 
 
Well, that's true. I hope this distinction will be incorporated into this 
glossary, rather simply showing "XML" as 2-stars example (which is misleading 
not only for me, but also for others around me). 
 
 
* I think the POINT is that the data should be published in a way
>suited for machine consumption. A format should NOT be considered
>"machine readable" simply because someone cooked up a hack on
>Scraperwiki for getting the data out of an otherwise opaque data dump
>on a site
 
Yes, it is desirable that data is published for machine "consumption" in Linked 
Data space, though my point was that the term "Machine Readable" is too general 
to be redefined for LD perspective.  
 
 
* The argument against having a separate term is simply that
>(arguably) the common case for publishing "machine readable" data *is*
>structured data, and adding the a special "structured" category merely
>confuses adopters.
>* The argument for a new term is, if the reason we want "machine
>readable data" is because we expect (and usually get) structured data,
>then we should specify that what we REALLY want is "machine readable
>structured data..." (and explain what that means)
 
Well, "machine readable" data is *not necessarily* structured in general, so 
the second argument seems more reasonable, although I'm not arguing to add 
separate term, rather, thinking it is not good idea to redefine term "machine 
readable" just for a specific community. 
 
 
Thank you very much for the discussion.
 
cheers, 
 
 
-- 
@prefix : <http://www.kanzaki.com/ns/sig> . <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanz...@gmail.com"]. 

RE: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Michael Miller]

hi all,



XML takes on many levels of machine readability.  i would argue that if XML
came with an DTD/XML schema it is at least 3 star and possibly 4 star.
that at least was my experience with MAGE- ML (i'd say 3 star) and the
clinical XML for the TCGA project (4 star)



cheers,

michael



Michael Miller

Software Engineer

Institute for Systems Biology





*From:* KANZAKI Masahide [mailto:mkanz...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Monday, July 01, 2013 7:19 PM
*To:* John Erickson
*Cc:* Bernadette Hyland; W3C public GLD WG WG; Linked Data community;
egov-ig mailing list; HCLS
*Subject:* Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!



Hello John, thanks for reply, very much appreciated.



2013/7/2 John Erickson 

Thus, I think we should distinguish between "plain old XML" and Office
Open XML/OOXML/OpenXML; based on my understanding and what I read <>
OpenXML could be listed as an example three-star format.



Well, that's true. I hope this distinction will be incorporated into this
glossary, rather simply showing "XML" as 2-stars example (which is
misleading not only for me, but also for others around me).





* I think the POINT is that the data should be published in a way

suited for machine consumption. A format should NOT be considered
"machine readable" simply because someone cooked up a hack on
Scraperwiki for getting the data out of an otherwise opaque data dump
on a site



Yes, it is desirable that data is published for machine "consumption" in
Linked Data space, though my point was that the term "Machine Readable" is
too general to be redefined for LD perspective.





* The argument against having a separate term is simply that
(arguably) the common case for publishing "machine readable" data *is*
structured data, and adding the a special "structured" category merely
confuses adopters.
* The argument for a new term is, if the reason we want "machine
readable data" is because we expect (and usually get) structured data,
then we should specify that what we REALLY want is "machine readable
structured data..." (and explain what that means)



Well, "machine readable" data is *not necessarily* structured in general,
so the second argument seems more reasonable, although I'm not arguing to
add separate term, rather, thinking it is not good idea to redefine term
"machine readable" just for a specific community.





Thank you very much for the discussion.



cheers,





-- 
@prefix : <http://www.kanzaki.com/ns/sig# <http://www.kanzaki.com/ns/sig>>
. <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanz...@gmail.com"].

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[KANZAKI Masahide]

Excuse me, 2-stars and 3-stars data are still good and valuable, though
4-stars+ is, of course, better and encouraged.

best regards,


2013/7/2 Young,Jeff (OR) 

>  Two star sucks. So does three star. If you're extremely proud of two and
> three star data, you're missing the point.
>
>
-- 
@prefix :  . <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanz...@gmail.com"].

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Young,Jeff (OR)]

Two star sucks. So does three star. If you're extremely proud of two and three 
star data, you're missing the point.

Jeff

Sent from my iPad

On Jul 1, 2013, at 10:22 PM, "KANZAKI Masahide" 
mailto:mkanz...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Hello John, thanks for reply, very much appreciated.

2013/7/2 John Erickson mailto:olyerick...@gmail.com>>
Thus, I think we should distinguish between "plain old XML" and Office
Open XML/OOXML/OpenXML; based on my understanding and what I read <>
OpenXML could be listed as an example three-star format.

Well, that's true. I hope this distinction will be incorporated into this 
glossary, rather simply showing "XML" as 2-stars example (which is misleading 
not only for me, but also for others around me).


* I think the POINT is that the data should be published in a way
suited for machine consumption. A format should NOT be considered
"machine readable" simply because someone cooked up a hack on
Scraperwiki for getting the data out of an otherwise opaque data dump
on a site

Yes, it is desirable that data is published for machine "consumption" in Linked 
Data space, though my point was that the term "Machine Readable" is too general 
to be redefined for LD perspective.


* The argument against having a separate term is simply that
(arguably) the common case for publishing "machine readable" data *is*
structured data, and adding the a special "structured" category merely
confuses adopters.
* The argument for a new term is, if the reason we want "machine
readable data" is because we expect (and usually get) structured data,
then we should specify that what we REALLY want is "machine readable
structured data..." (and explain what that means)

Well, "machine readable" data is *not necessarily* structured in general, so 
the second argument seems more reasonable, although I'm not arguing to add 
separate term, rather, thinking it is not good idea to redefine term "machine 
readable" just for a specific community.


Thank you very much for the discussion.

cheers,


--
@prefix :  . <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email 
"mkanz...@gmail.com"].

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[KANZAKI Masahide]

Hello John, thanks for reply, very much appreciated.

2013/7/2 John Erickson 

> Thus, I think we should distinguish between "plain old XML" and Office
> Open XML/OOXML/OpenXML; based on my understanding and what I read <>
> OpenXML could be listed as an example three-star format.


Well, that's true. I hope this distinction will be incorporated into this
glossary, rather simply showing "XML" as 2-stars example (which is
misleading not only for me, but also for others around me).



> * I think the POINT is that the data should be published in a way
> suited for machine consumption. A format should NOT be considered
> "machine readable" simply because someone cooked up a hack on
> Scraperwiki for getting the data out of an otherwise opaque data dump
> on a site
>

Yes, it is desirable that data is published for machine "consumption" in
Linked Data space, though my point was that the term "Machine Readable" is
too general to be redefined for LD perspective.



> * The argument against having a separate term is simply that
> (arguably) the common case for publishing "machine readable" data *is*
> structured data, and adding the a special "structured" category merely
> confuses adopters.
> * The argument for a new term is, if the reason we want "machine
> readable data" is because we expect (and usually get) structured data,
> then we should specify that what we REALLY want is "machine readable
> structured data..." (and explain what that means)
>

Well, "machine readable" data is *not necessarily* structured in general,
so the second argument seems more reasonable, although I'm not arguing to
add separate term, rather, thinking it is not good idea to redefine term
"machine readable" just for a specific community.


Thank you very much for the discussion.

cheers,


-- 
@prefix :  . <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanz...@gmail.com"].

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[John Erickson]

Thanks for your comments, Kanzaki!

You wrote:
> 1. 5 Star ...:
> I'm afraid I don't understand why XML is 2-star (implying proprietary
> format), lower rated than CSV. Does it mean Excel ? (but even Excel uses
> non-proprietary OpenXML now).
> I'd suggest this section should include a link to the TimBL's original
> scheme.

Please note that the formats listed are EXAMPLES...
I think the point w.r.t. spreadsheets is that they are not merely
published using OpenXML, but also using a well-defined document model
that makes the semantics of their content more accessible.

I believe the thinking on XML being listed under two stars is that
often data has been dumped out of some government's data catacombs
using XML serialization but no clear explanation of structure or
semantics. OpenXML has a clearly (and openly) defined structure and a
protocol for interpretation, and thus should get more stars than
"XML." A dumb XML artifact is somewhat more usable than dumping the
data in PDF, but is not as usable or accessible as a CSV, which
usually provides the data in a tabular format wherein the semantics of
each cell are more accessible. This is a sweeping generalization, but
it is often the case.

Thus, I think we should distinguish between "plain old XML" and Office
Open XML/OOXML/OpenXML; based on my understanding and what I read <>
OpenXML could be listed as an example three-star format.

> 58. Machine Readable Data:
> I think "without access to proprietary libraries" is not well fit for the
> definition of this widely used term (it could be called "Open Machine
> Readable Data" or something, if this condition is necessary). Moreover, I
> don't believe "PDF and Microsoft Excel" are good counter examples. There are
> many open source PDF libraries, and parsing OpenXML is not very difficult.

* I agree that "Open, Machine Readable Data" or "Openly Machine
Readable Data" is a better fit with our definition than "Machine
Readable." I believe the distinctions are:
** "Machine Readable Data" is readily accessed using available
libraries or protocols
** "Open (or Openly) Machine Readable Data" is readily accessed using
freely-available libraries or protocols
* I think the POINT is that the data should be published in a way
suited for machine consumption. A format should NOT be considered
"machine readable" simply because someone cooked up a hack on
Scraperwiki for getting the data out of an otherwise opaque data dump
on a site
* On that point, data may be structured within PDF documents in a
variety of ways, depending upon the source program and the code used
to generate the PDF (including such tools as LaTeX).
** IF there was a well-documented and widely-adopted approach for
embedding tabular data in PDFs and IF API for identifying and pulling
out such data from PDFs, then perhaps PDF-published data could be
considered. NOTE: I am NOT talking about metadata...
** One could even embed RDF Linked Data in PDFs using such a
technique. If it only existed...

> Probably, what is needed here is a sort of "Machine Readable Structured
> Data", which PDF and Excel data are sometimes not. However, unstructured
> Excel data is not the fault of the format, but the usage of it, IMHO.

I get your meaning, and this *might* be a useful distinction to make.
I'm wondering however if we really want/need an additional entry in
the Glossary.
* The argument against having a separate term is simply that
(arguably) the common case for publishing "machine readable" data *is*
structured data, and adding the a special "structured" category merely
confuses adopters.
* The argument for a new term is, if the reason we want "machine
readable data" is because we expect (and usually get) structured data,
then we should specify that what we REALLY want is "machine readable
structured data..." (and explain what that means)

John

>
> cheers,
>
>
>
> 2013/6/28 Bernadette Hyland 
>>
>> Hi,
>> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
>> peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note
>> effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>>
>> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined
>> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best
>> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>>
>> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
>> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
>> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
>> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
>> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>>
>> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
>> initial glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011). The
>> editors wish to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working
>> Group with special thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker,
>> Hadley Beeman, Richard Cyganiak, Michae

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[KANZAKI Masahide]

Hello, congrats on hard efforts. A few comments:

1. 5 Star ...:
I'm afraid I don't understand why XML is 2-star (implying proprietary
format), lower rated than CSV. Does it mean Excel ? (but even Excel uses
non-proprietary OpenXML now).
I'd suggest this section should include a link to the TimBL's original
scheme.


58. Machine Readable Data:
I think "without access to proprietary libraries" is not well fit for the
definition of this widely used term (it could be called "Open Machine
Readable Data" or something, if this condition is necessary). Moreover, I
don't believe "PDF and Microsoft Excel" are good counter examples. There
are many open source PDF libraries, and parsing OpenXML is not very
difficult.

Probably, what is needed here is a sort of "Machine Readable Structured
Data", which PDF and Excel data are sometimes not. However, unstructured
Excel data is not the fault of the format, but the usage of it, IMHO.

cheers,



2013/6/28 Bernadette Hyland 

> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
> Data,
> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
> Linked Data Working Group  with special
> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
> list, please accept our apologies.
>
> Thank you one & all!
>
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette 
> Hyland,
> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
> Atemezing,
> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
> IBM
>
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>



-- 
@prefix :  . <> :from [:name
"KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanz...@gmail.com"].

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Gannon Dick]

The Linked Data Glossary mentions Meta Data Object Schemes (MODS), a Library of 
Congress (LOC) citation scheme.  As you know, Bernadette, I (heart) Linked Data 
to death, and (user) annotations are a great idea. Still for Government Policy, 
annotations as Crowd Sourced Opinion, Easter Eggs, Sponsored Links (whatever 
you want to call them) are not Democracy Ajectives.  They are easy to 
remove/redact from XML Citations (like MODS) with XSLT (also mentioned in the 
Glossary), provided that you intended to remove them at some point.  You simply 
enclose the material to be redacted as Tagged Marginalia (a Librarianesque Term 
for "don't let me catch you writing in the margins!, keyword:catch").  In my 
example (MODS 3.4+XHTML 1.0) the tag is .  Validation by 
XSD, partial redaction (to comments) etc. is possible.  I am having trouble 
uploading to my web site at the moment, so if you want a copy of the example, 
email me.

I am not sure what this "feature" looks like in JSON or JSON-LD.  I doubt is 
quite that transparent.





 From: Bernadette Hyland 
To: paoladimai...@googlemail.com 
Cc: public-ldp...@w3.org; egov-ig mailing list ; W3C 
public GLD WG WG ; Linked Data community 
 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!
 


Hi Paolo,
Oh like that idea of annotations a lot!  I don't want to get ahead of myself 
here but assuming the Open Data Directory CG is happy to publish the glossary 
as LOD from the w3.org namespace, we can readily incorporate a new feature 
supporting the open annotations spec as nanopublications using Callimachus (the 
FLOSS data platform that the Open Data Directory is built on).  That would be a 
nice exemplar and certainly a good demonstration of LOD in the wild.

Thank you for the suggestion and we'll report back on progress this summer.  
Maybe you can test the future implementation & see if the workflow makes sense?


Cheers,

Bernadette

On Jun 27, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Paola Di Maio  wrote:

yep
>
>
>great work, B and all
>a starting point, and hopefully a valuable learning /teaching resource as well
> #webscience #learning
>-  could it be useful perhaps to find a way of quickly add annotations to the 
>terms, so that when things crop up, input from (registered?)  users can be 
>recorded, and considered in future iterations
>
>
>cheers
>
>
>P
>
>
>
>On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Bernadette Hyland  
>wrote:
>
>Hi,
>>On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the 
>>peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note 
>>effective 27-June-2013.[1]  
>>
>>
>>We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined 
>>and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best 
>>practices for publishing structured data on the Web.  
>>
>>
>>The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions between 
>>the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us appreciate 
>>the application of different technologies for different use cases.  We hope 
>>the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your discussions about data 
>>sharing on the Web.
>>
>>
>>Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the initial 
>>glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011).  The editors 
>>wish to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working Group with 
>>special thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, 
Hadley Beeman, Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, 
Benedikt Kaempgen, James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and 
Dave Reynolds who diligently iterated the W3C  Linked Data Glossary in order to 
create a foundation of terms upon 
which to discuss and better describe the Web of Data.  If there is anyone that 
the editors inadvertently overlooked in this list, please accept our apologies. 
>>
>>
>>Thank you one & all!
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>Bernadette Hyland, 3 Round Stones
>>Ghislain Atemezing, EURECOM
>>Michael Pendleton, US Environmental Protection Agency
>>Biplav Srivastava, IBM
>>
>>W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
>>Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/ 
>>
>>
>>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernadette Hyland]

Hi Ghis,
The Community Directory has transitioned to the the Open Data Directory CG of 
which you're a member :-). Some of the same people who support the the 
Directory also contributed on the glossary development. We can incorporate new 
features as the CG has the time & resources to commit.  Let's discuss further 
in July.  Dave's suggestion is a good one IMO & I can see how to make it work 
if others think so too.

Bonjour ne,
Bernadette

On Jun 27, 2013, at 6:15 PM, Ghislain Atemezing  
wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
>> How about publishing it on dir.w3.org using a W3C namespace?
> 
> I don't understand how it could be done on comDir. Directly as a product of 
> W3C? Or like other suggested before?
> At the moment in dir.w3.org, when you click on W3C, under "Project", you can 
> reach the Glossary itself after 4-5 links [1] Viva follow-your-nose concept ;)
> 
> Well, it is also clear that we will have to define a good strategy for the 
> URIs. And I guess that why there is a new WG to take over this work?!
> 
> Best,
> Ghislain
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/gld#w3c_all

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernadette Hyland]

Hi Melvin,
Thanks. May I ask you to provide definitions for each of the proposed terms 
please?  TIA.  I believe we'll be able to update assuming the GLD WG extension 
is approved.

Cheers,

Bernadette

On Jun 27, 2013, at 2:31 PM, Melvin Carvalho  wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> On 27 June 2013 17:08, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:
> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the 
> peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note 
> effective 27-June-2013.[1]  
> 
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined 
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best 
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.  
> 
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions between 
> the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us appreciate 
> the application of different technologies for different use cases.  We hope 
> the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your discussions about data 
> sharing on the Web.
> 
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the initial 
> glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011). The editors 
> wish to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working Group with 
> special thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley 
> Beeman, Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt 
> Kaempgen, James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds 
> who diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a 
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of 
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this 
> list, please accept our apologies. 
> 
> Looks awesome, well done!  I was actually asked for something like this 
> already this month.
> 
> Would there be any possibility to add two more, which come up a bit:
> 
> FP -- Functional Property
> IFP -- Inverse Functional Property
>  
> 
> Thank you one & all!
> 
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette Hyland, 3 Round Stones
> Ghislain Atemezing, EURECOM
> Michael Pendleton, US Environmental Protection Agency
> Biplav Srivastava, IBM
> 
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
> 

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernadette Hyland]

Hi Ghis,
Now that the glossary is published, we're considering publishing through 
OpenDataDir CG as LOD.  Will reach out to this list when the planning phase 
happens, already some great suggestions from various people on how to keep this 
current & useful.   Agree with your recommendations :-)

Cheers,
Bernadette 


On Jun 27, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Ghislain Atemezing  
wrote:

> Hi Bernard, Stephane, all
>> Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In
>> SKOS for example :)
> We had a discussion on that within the group [1] and the group decided not to 
> do, but encourage people  to republish the glossary as LD as long as it 
> conforms to good stable URI policy.[2]
> 
> That said, it could be a good idea to have such an effort.
> 
> Best,
> Ghislain
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Mar/0138.html
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Mar/0150.html
> -- 
> Ghislain Atemezing
> EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
> Campus SophiaTech
> 450, route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France.
> e-mail: auguste.atemez...@eurecom.fr & ghislain.atemez...@gmail.com
> Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8178
> Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
> Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~atemezin
> 

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernadette Hyland]

Hi Paolo,
Oh like that idea of annotations a lot!  I don't want to get ahead of myself 
here but assuming the Open Data Directory CG is happy to publish the glossary 
as LOD from the w3.org namespace, we can readily incorporate a new feature 
supporting the open annotations spec as nanopublications using Callimachus (the 
FLOSS data platform that the Open Data Directory is built on).  That would be a 
nice exemplar and certainly a good demonstration of LOD in the wild.

Thank you for the suggestion and we'll report back on progress this summer.  
Maybe you can test the future implementation & see if the workflow makes sense?

Cheers,

Bernadette

On Jun 27, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Paola Di Maio  wrote:

> yep
> 
> great work, B and all
> a starting point, and hopefully a valuable learning /teaching resource as well
>  #webscience #learning
> -  could it be useful perhaps to find a way of quickly add annotations to the 
> terms, so that when things crop up, input from (registered?)  users can be 
> recorded, and considered in future iterations
> 
> cheers
> 
> P
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Bernadette Hyland  
> wrote:
> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the 
> peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note 
> effective 27-June-2013.[1]  
> 
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined 
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best 
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.  
> 
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions between 
> the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us appreciate 
> the application of different technologies for different use cases.  We hope 
> the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your discussions about data 
> sharing on the Web.
> 
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the initial 
> glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011). The editors 
> wish to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working Group with 
> special thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley 
> Beeman, Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt 
> Kaempgen, James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds 
> who diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a 
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of 
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this 
> list, please accept our apologies. 
> 
> Thank you one & all!
> 
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette Hyland, 3 Round Stones
> Ghislain Atemezing, EURECOM
> Michael Pendleton, US Environmental Protection Agency
> Biplav Srivastava, IBM
> 
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
> 

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernadette Hyland]

Hi Bernard,
Yes, the GLD WG discussed but at the time we said we wanted to prioritize 
getting the HTML version out before our charter ended.   Now that it done, it 
is easy to produce a version as LOD using SKOS.  I'll suggest it to the newly 
formed Open Data Directory Community Group as we can easily publish the 
glossary as LOD on w3.org namespace. If people agree, I'll commit to doing it 
in July.  

Once published as LOD, I encourage others to take it & extend it as they see 
useful.  Thanks for the suggestion.

Cheers,

Bernadette Hyland
CEO, 3 Round Stones, Inc.

Skype. BernHyland
Main. +1-877-290-2127
http://3roundstones.com
@3RoundStones

Linked Data Specialists


On Jun 27, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Bernard Vatant  wrote:

> Hi Bernadette
> 
> Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In SKOS 
> for example :)
> 
> Bernard
> 
> Bernard Vatant
> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
> Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
> Skype : bernard.vatant
> Blog : the wheel and the hub
> Linked Open Vocabularies : lov.okfn.org 
> 
> Mondeca 
> 3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France
> www.mondeca.com
> Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews
> --
> Meet us during the European Open Data Week in Marseille (June 25-28)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2013/6/27 Bernadette Hyland 
> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the 
> peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note 
> effective 27-June-2013.[1]  
> 
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined 
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best 
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.  
> 
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions between 
> the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us appreciate 
> the application of different technologies for different use cases.  We hope 
> the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your discussions about data 
> sharing on the Web.
> 
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the initial 
> glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011). The editors 
> wish to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working Group with 
> special thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley 
> Beeman, Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt 
> Kaempgen, James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds 
> who diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a 
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of 
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this 
> list, please accept our apologies. 
> 
> Thank you one & all!
> 
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette Hyland, 3 Round Stones
> Ghislain Atemezing, EURECOM
> Michael Pendleton, US Environmental Protection Agency
> Biplav Srivastava, IBM
> 
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
> 

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Ghislain Atemezing]

Hi David,

> How about publishing it on dir.w3.org using a W3C namespace?

I don't understand how it could be done on comDir. Directly as a product of 
W3C? Or like other suggested before?
At the moment in dir.w3.org, when you click on W3C, under "Project", you can 
reach the Glossary itself after 4-5 links [1] Viva follow-your-nose concept ;)

Well, it is also clear that we will have to define a good strategy for the 
URIs. And I guess that why there is a new WG to take over this work?!

Best,
Ghislain

[1] http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/gld#w3c_all

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[David Wood]

On Jun 27, 2013, at 13:18, Ghislain Atemezing  
wrote:

> Hi Bernard, Stephane, all
>> Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In
>> SKOS for example :)
> We had a discussion on that within the group [1] and the group decided not to 
> do, but encourage people  to republish the glossary as LD as long as it 
> conforms to good stable URI policy.[2]
> 
> That said, it could be a good idea to have such an effort.

How about publishing it on dir.w3.org using a W3C namespace?

Regards,
Dave
--
http://about.me/david_wood


> 
> Best,
> Ghislain
> 
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Mar/0138.html
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Mar/0150.html
> -- 
> Ghislain Atemezing
> EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
> Campus SophiaTech
> 450, route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France.
> e-mail: auguste.atemez...@eurecom.fr & ghislain.atemez...@gmail.com
> Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8178
> Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
> Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~atemezin
> 
> 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Stéphane Corlosquet]

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Melvin Carvalho
wrote:

>
>
>
> On 27 June 2013 17:08, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
>> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
>> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>>
>> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms
>> defined and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies
>> and best practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>>
>> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
>> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
>> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
>> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
>> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>>
>> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
>> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
>> Data,
>> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
>> Linked Data Working Group  with special
>> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
>> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
>> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
>> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
>> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
>> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
>> list, please accept our apologies.
>>
>
> Looks awesome, well done!  I was actually asked for something like this
> already this month.
>
> Would there be any possibility to add two more, which come up a bit:
>
> FP -- Functional Property
> IFP -- Inverse Functional Property
>

This might be border line with getting into the details of RDFS/OWL, and it
might be why it was left out. RDF class and property are not even defined
for example, and they would be required for defining FP and IFP. What
criteria did the group use to draw the line so far?

also
"A Linked Data approach is seen as an valid alternative..."
s/an valid/a valid/

Steph.

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Melvin Carvalho]

On 27 June 2013 17:08, Bernadette Hyland  wrote:

> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
> Data,
> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
> Linked Data Working Group  with special
> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
> list, please accept our apologies.
>

Looks awesome, well done!  I was actually asked for something like this
already this month.

Would there be any possibility to add two more, which come up a bit:

FP -- Functional Property
IFP -- Inverse Functional Property


>
> Thank you one & all!
>
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette 
> Hyland,
> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
> Atemezing,
> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
> IBM
>
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Ghislain Atemezing]

Hi Bernard, Stephane, all

Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In
SKOS for example :)
We had a discussion on that within the group [1] and the group decided 
not to do, but encourage people  to republish the glossary as LD as long 
as it conforms to good stable URI policy.[2]


That said, it could be a good idea to have such an effort.

Best,
Ghislain

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Mar/0138.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-gld-wg/2013Mar/0150.html
--
Ghislain Atemezing
EURECOM, Multimedia Communications Department
Campus SophiaTech
450, route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France.
e-mail: auguste.atemez...@eurecom.fr & ghislain.atemez...@gmail.com
Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8178
Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~atemezin

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Stephane Fellah]

Bernard,

I was thinking the same thing. If it is not done, I would be interested to
participate in this effort.

Stephane Fellah
smartRealm LLC


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Bernard Vatant  wrote:

> Hi Bernadette
>
> Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In
> SKOS for example :)
>
> Bernard
>
> *Bernard Vatant
> *
> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
> Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
>  Skype : bernard.vatant
> Blog : the wheel and the hub 
> Linked Open Vocabularies : lov.okfn.org
> 
> *Mondeca**  **   *
> 3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France
> www.mondeca.com
> Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews 
> --
> Meet us during the European Open Data Week  in
> Marseille (June 25-28)
>
>
>
>
> 2013/6/27 Bernadette Hyland 
>
>> Hi,
>> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
>> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
>> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>>
>> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms
>> defined and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies
>> and best practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>>
>> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
>> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
>> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
>> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
>> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>>
>> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
>> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
>> Data,
>> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
>> Linked Data Working Group  with special
>> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
>> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
>> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
>> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
>> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
>> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
>> list, please accept our apologies.
>>
>> Thank you one & all!
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Bernadette 
>> Hyland,
>> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
>> Atemezing,
>> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
>> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
>> IBM
>>
>> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
>> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>>
>
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernard Vatant]

Hi Bernadette

Great job. What about a publication of the glossary as linked data? In SKOS
for example :)

Bernard

*Bernard Vatant
*
Vocabularies & Data Engineering
Tel :  + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
 Skype : bernard.vatant
Blog : the wheel and the hub 
Linked Open Vocabularies : lov.okfn.org

*Mondeca**  **   *
3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France
www.mondeca.com
Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews 
--
Meet us during the European Open Data Week  in
Marseille (June 25-28)




2013/6/27 Bernadette Hyland 

> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
> Data,
> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
> Linked Data Working Group  with special
> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
> list, please accept our apologies.
>
> Thank you one & all!
>
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette 
> Hyland,
> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
> Atemezing,
> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
> IBM
>
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Juan Sequeda]

Bernadette and all,

Congrats! This is an amazing resource. I'm so happy to see all of the terms
finally in one place.

Also glad to see that R2RML is there. But Direct Mapping [1] is missing.
Any chance it could be added in the next iteration?

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdb-direct-mapping/

Juan Sequeda
+1-575-SEQ-UEDA
www.juansequeda.com


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Bernadette Hyland <
bhyl...@3roundstones.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
> Data,
> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
> Linked Data Working Group  with special
> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
> list, please accept our apologies.
>
> Thank you one & all!
>
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette 
> Hyland,
> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
> Atemezing,
> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
> IBM
>
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>

Re: Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Stephane Fellah]

Great work ! Thank you for putting this together. I hope this will put at
rest some of the terminology discussions that occurred over the last weeks.

Sincerely
Stephane Fellah


On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Bernadette Hyland <
bhyl...@3roundstones.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the
> peer-reviewed *Linked Data Glossary* published as a W3C Working Group
> Note effective 27-June-2013.[1]
>
> We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined
> and used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best
> practices for publishing structured data on the Web.
>
> The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions
> between the Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us
> appreciate the application of different technologies for different use
> cases.  We hope the glossary serves as a useful starting point in your
> discussions about data sharing on the Web.
>
> Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the
> initial glossary terms from Linking Government 
> Data,
> (Springer 2011). The editors wish to also thank members of the Government
> Linked Data Working Group  with special
> thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman,
> Richard Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen,
> James McKinney, Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who
> diligently iterated the W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a
> foundation of terms upon which to discuss and better describe the Web of
> Data.  If there is anyone that the editors inadvertently overlooked in this
> list, please accept our apologies.
>
> Thank you one & all!
>
> Sincerely,
> Bernadette 
> Hyland,
> 3 Round Stones  Ghislain 
> Atemezing,
> EURECOM  Michael Pendleton, US Environmental
> Protection Agency  Biplav Srivastava, 
> IBM
>
> W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
> Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/
>

Linked Data Glossary is published!

[Bernadette Hyland]

Hi,
On behalf of the editors, I'm pleased to announce the publication of the 
peer-reviewed Linked Data Glossary published as a W3C Working Group Note 
effective 27-June-2013.[1]  

We hope this document serves as a useful glossary containing terms defined and 
used to describe Linked Data, and its associated vocabularies and best 
practices for publishing structured data on the Web.  

The LD Glossary is intended to help foster constructive discussions between the 
Web 2.0 and 3.0 developer communities, encouraging all of us appreciate the 
application of different technologies for different use cases.  We hope the 
glossary serves as a useful starting point in your discussions about data 
sharing on the Web.

Finally, the editors are grateful to David Wood for contributing the initial 
glossary terms from Linking Government Data, (Springer 2011). The editors wish 
to also thank members of the Government Linked Data Working Group with special 
thanks to the reviewers and contributors: Thomas Baker, Hadley Beeman, Richard 
Cyganiak, Michael Hausenblas, Sandro Hawke, Benedikt Kaempgen, James McKinney, 
Marios Meimaris, Jindrich Mynarz and Dave Reynolds who diligently iterated the 
W3C Linked Data Glossary in order to create a foundation of terms upon which to 
discuss and better describe the Web of Data.  If there is anyone that the 
editors inadvertently overlooked in this list, please accept our apologies. 

Thank you one & all!

Sincerely,
Bernadette Hyland, 3 Round Stones
Ghislain Atemezing, EURECOM
Michael Pendleton, US Environmental Protection Agency
Biplav Srivastava, IBM

W3C Government Linked Data Working Group
Charter: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ld-glossary/