Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Kingsley Idehen]

On 4/1/13 10:38 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:

Thanks Kingsley.
Would be nice if I did :-)
Unfortunately just the little panel at the top left that you look at is 
actually constructed by resolving at least the 33 URIs at 
http://southampton.rkbexplorer.com/crs/export/?uri=http://southampton.rkbexplorer.com/id/person-07113
If you add in the other panels, then you would need to include all the URIs 
from those 33 documents, and even possibly some of the URIs from those 
documents.

Mind you, the 33 URIs are linked from the basic web page, so you can get there, 
which is good.
Some people, of course, have many hundreds of URIs contributing to that tiny 
little panel.

Of course, better than nothing.


Yes, "better than nothing" is my fundamental point. I am trying to 
encourage a "best effort approach" to leveraging Linked Data URIs as a 
powerful mechanism for citations, attribution, and provenance oriented 
metadata discovery :-)


Kingsley

Best
Hugh
On 1 Apr 2013, at 15:16, Kingsley Idehen 
  wrote:


On 4/1/13 9:16 AM, Dominic Oldman wrote:

Hugh,

Yes, you are correct... and there are also issues when mashing together data 
from different sites.This is yet another reason why formal and mandatory 'URI 
attribution' is not workable. The original question was a sort of provocation.

Hugh actually implements a solution to this particular Linked URI based 
citation challenge, showcased in his example page where he uses Linked Data 
URIs to anchor literal denotations of key entities mentioned in his document. 
The approach he has taken enables browser extensions (e.g., ODE [1]) to provide 
context menu enhancements to existing browsers that enable scoping of Linked 
Data lookups to specific text anchors [2][3].


Therefore the encouraging words would be about using object URI's when 
appropriate - i.e, if you are talking about individual objects - which is 
likely to be a significant use.

I don't think there is a good answer to this but just from a practical 
perspective it would be very nice if people included our object URIs and gave 
people the opportunity and choice to see the source. This shouldn't be a 
problem for many sites if they understand how to do it.

Sorry about my record on Public LOD. I have had some technical problems with it 
and still do (my message bodies don't appear on the web site - I though I was 
being censored :-)). I will try to do better in the future.

Dominic

Links:

1. http://ode.openlinksw.com -- OpenLink Data Explorer
2. 
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/Screenshots/cite-attribution-using-linkeddata-1.png
 -- ODE context-menu enhancement example screenshot #1
3. 
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/Screenshots/cite-attribution-using-linkeddata-2.png
 -- ditto #2


Kingsley











From: Hugh Glaser 
To: Dominic Oldman 
Cc: "public-lod@w3.org community" 
Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 13:47
Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque 
HTML pages?

Hi Dominic,
Nice when it is the holiday weekend, so we hear from you :-)

On 1 Apr 2013, at 13:19, Dominic Oldman 
wrote:



For the specific case of the BMs endpoint would the ideal situation be that 
there is no formal attribution requirement (friction free) but rather some 
encouraging (but not mandatory) words about embedding at least the URI of the 
object record in a web publication.

Sounds perfect to me.
Looks like I was wrong about Chris Gutteridge's http://data.southampton.ac.uk/ 
license - I'm sure it used to have something like that, but now it is either 
OGL or nothing.
I guess he got the University to formally agree OGL, which is great.

There is no need for every URI to be included, but the inclusion of the object 
URI  (a simple matter if you are querying the EndPouint) would provide 
everything that anyone would need, particularly since every object record is a 
graph and therefore only the main URI is needed to collect all the triples for 
an individual object.

Let's try an example.
Perhaps a little contrived, but…
I might decide to produce a statistics site about objects in museums, and for 
the BM used your lovely data to find out about year of acquisition, size, 
weight, age etc., of a significant range (or even all) of your collection.
Let's say I show mean and SD, for example.
This doesn't really conform to the idea of having an "object URI", but clearly 
draws on the graph for every one of them.

Best
Hugh

It would be good to have some best practice guidelines that general web site 
developers can reference (and we can reproduce or link to on our sites) when 
querying triplestores.

Dominic

From: Hugh Glaser 
To: "public-lod@w3.org" 
Cc: Kingsley Idehen 
Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 12:51
Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque 
HTML pages?

These aims are laudable, and are a good objective when possible.
And I note, Kingsley, th

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Hugh Glaser]

Thanks Kingsley.
Would be nice if I did :-)
Unfortunately just the little panel at the top left that you look at is 
actually constructed by resolving at least the 33 URIs at 
http://southampton.rkbexplorer.com/crs/export/?uri=http://southampton.rkbexplorer.com/id/person-07113
If you add in the other panels, then you would need to include all the URIs 
from those 33 documents, and even possibly some of the URIs from those 
documents.

Mind you, the 33 URIs are linked from the basic web page, so you can get there, 
which is good.
Some people, of course, have many hundreds of URIs contributing to that tiny 
little panel.

Of course, better than nothing.
Best
Hugh
On 1 Apr 2013, at 15:16, Kingsley Idehen 
 wrote:

> On 4/1/13 9:16 AM, Dominic Oldman wrote:
>> Hugh,
>> 
>> Yes, you are correct... and there are also issues when mashing together data 
>> from different sites.This is yet another reason why formal and mandatory 
>> 'URI attribution' is not workable. The original question was a sort of 
>> provocation.
> 
> Hugh actually implements a solution to this particular Linked URI based 
> citation challenge, showcased in his example page where he uses Linked Data 
> URIs to anchor literal denotations of key entities mentioned in his document. 
> The approach he has taken enables browser extensions (e.g., ODE [1]) to 
> provide context menu enhancements to existing browsers that enable scoping of 
> Linked Data lookups to specific text anchors [2][3]. 
> 
>> 
>> Therefore the encouraging words would be about using object URI's when 
>> appropriate - i.e, if you are talking about individual objects - which is 
>> likely to be a significant use.  
>> 
>> I don't think there is a good answer to this but just from a practical 
>> perspective it would be very nice if people included our object URIs and 
>> gave people the opportunity and choice to see the source. This shouldn't be 
>> a problem for many sites if they understand how to do it.
>> 
>> Sorry about my record on Public LOD. I have had some technical problems with 
>> it and still do (my message bodies don't appear on the web site - I though I 
>> was being censored :-)). I will try to do better in the future.
>> 
>> Dominic
> 
> Links:
> 
> 1. http://ode.openlinksw.com -- OpenLink Data Explorer
> 2. 
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/Screenshots/cite-attribution-using-linkeddata-1.png
>  -- ODE context-menu enhancement example screenshot #1
> 3. 
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/Screenshots/cite-attribution-using-linkeddata-2.png
>  -- ditto #2
> 
> 
> Kingsley 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>
>> 
>> 
>> From: Hugh Glaser 
>> To: Dominic Oldman  
>> Cc: "public-lod@w3.org community"  
>> Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 13:47
>> Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish 
>> opaque HTML pages?
>> 
>> Hi Dominic,
>> Nice when it is the holiday weekend, so we hear from you :-)
>> 
>> On 1 Apr 2013, at 13:19, Dominic Oldman 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > For the specific case of the BMs endpoint would the ideal situation be 
>> > that there is no formal attribution requirement (friction free) but rather 
>> > some encouraging (but not mandatory) words about embedding at least the 
>> > URI of the object record in a web publication.
>> Sounds perfect to me.
>> Looks like I was wrong about Chris Gutteridge's 
>> http://data.southampton.ac.uk/ license - I'm sure it used to have something 
>> like that, but now it is either OGL or nothing.
>> I guess he got the University to formally agree OGL, which is great.
>> > 
>> > There is no need for every URI to be included, but the inclusion of the 
>> > object URI  (a simple matter if you are querying the EndPouint) would 
>> > provide everything that anyone would need, particularly since every object 
>> > record is a graph and therefore only the main URI is needed to collect all 
>> > the triples for an individual object.
>> Let's try an example.
>> Perhaps a little contrived, but…
>> I might decide to produce a statistics site about objects in museums, and 
>> for the BM used your lovely data to find out about year of acquisition, 
>> size, weight, age etc., of a significant range (or even all) of your 
>> collection.
>> Let's say I show mean and SD, for example.
>> This doesn't really conform to the idea of having an "object URI", but 
>> clearly draws on the graph for every one of them.
&

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Kingsley Idehen]

On 4/1/13 9:16 AM, Dominic Oldman wrote:

Hugh,

Yes, you are correct... and there are also issues when mashing 
together data from different sites.This is yet another reason why 
formal and mandatory 'URI attribution' is not workable. The original 
question was a sort of provocation.


Hugh actually implements a solution to this particular Linked URI based 
citation challenge, showcased in his example page where he uses Linked 
Data URIs to anchor literal denotations of key entities mentioned in his 
document. The approach he has taken enables browser extensions (e.g., 
ODE [1]) to provide context menu enhancements to existing browsers that 
enable scoping of Linked Data lookups to specific text anchors [2][3].




Therefore the encouraging words would be about using object URI's when 
appropriate - i.e, if you are talking about individual objects - which 
is likely to be a significant use.


I don't think there is a good answer to this but just from a practical 
perspective it would be very nice if people included our object URIs 
and gave people the opportunity and choice to see the source. This 
shouldn't be a problem for many sites if they understand how to do it.


Sorry about my record on Public LOD. I have had some technical 
problems with it and still do (my message bodies don't appear on the 
web site - I though I was being censored :-)). I will try to do better 
in the future.


Dominic


Links:

1. http://ode.openlinksw.com -- OpenLink Data Explorer
2. 
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/Screenshots/cite-attribution-using-linkeddata-1.png 
-- ODE context-menu enhancement example screenshot #1
3. 
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/11096946/Screenshots/cite-attribution-using-linkeddata-2.png 
-- ditto #2



Kingsley











*From:* Hugh Glaser 
*To:* Dominic Oldman 
*Cc:* "public-lod@w3.org community" 
*Sent:* Monday, 1 April 2013, 13:47
*Subject:* Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and 
publish opaque HTML pages?


Hi Dominic,
Nice when it is the holiday weekend, so we hear from you :-)

On 1 Apr 2013, at 13:19, Dominic Oldman <mailto:do...@oldman.me.uk>>

wrote:

>
>
> For the specific case of the BMs endpoint would the ideal situation 
be that there is no formal attribution requirement (friction free) but 
rather some encouraging (but not mandatory) words about embedding at 
least the URI of the object record in a web publication.

Sounds perfect to me.
Looks like I was wrong about Chris Gutteridge's 
http://data.southampton.ac.uk/ license - I'm sure it used to have 
something like that, but now it is either OGL or nothing.

I guess he got the University to formally agree OGL, which is great.
>
> There is no need for every URI to be included, but the inclusion of 
the object URI  (a simple matter if you are querying the EndPouint) 
would provide everything that anyone would need, particularly since 
every object record is a graph and therefore only the main URI is 
needed to collect all the triples for an individual object.

Let's try an example.
Perhaps a little contrived, but…
I might decide to produce a statistics site about objects in museums, 
and for the BM used your lovely data to find out about year of 
acquisition, size, weight, age etc., of a significant range (or even 
all) of your collection.

Let's say I show mean and SD, for example.
This doesn't really conform to the idea of having an "object URI", but 
clearly draws on the graph for every one of them.


Best
Hugh
>
> It would be good to have some best practice guidelines that general 
web site developers can reference (and we can reproduce or link to on 
our sites) when querying triplestores.

>
> Dominic
>
> From: Hugh Glaser mailto:h...@ecs.soton.ac.uk>>
> To: "public-lod@w3.org <mailto:public-lod@w3.org>" 
mailto:public-lod@w3.org>>
> Cc: Kingsley Idehen <mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>>

> Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 12:51
> Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and 
publish opaque HTML pages?

>
> These aims are laudable, and are a good objective when possible.
> And I note, Kingsley, that your post talks about "republish the 
extracted content", and I roughly agree with you.

>
> But the wider discussion seems to me to have a very simplistic, if 
not naive, view of how LOD is used in practice (well, at least 
compared to the way I use it :-) ).
> A typical page of something like http://apps.seme4.com/see-uk/ 
(sorry, hardware fault at the moment) or 
http://www.dotac.info/explorer/ uses many hundreds, or even thousands 
of RDF documents from hundreds of domains retrieved via URIs.
> The contribution of some documents may be as little as lending 
weight to an inference that was calculated several years ago, and the 
document 

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Dominic Oldman]

Hugh,

Yes, you are correct... and there are also issues when mashing together data 
from different sites.This is yet another reason why formal and mandatory 'URI 
attribution' is not workable. The original question was a sort of provocation.

Therefore the encouraging words would be about using object URI's when 
appropriate - i.e, if you are talking about individual objects - which is 
likely to be a significant use.  

I don't think there is a good answer to this but just from a practical 
perspective it would be very nice if people included our object URIs and gave 
people the opportunity and choice to see the source.This shouldn't be a problem 
for many sites if they understand how to do it.

Sorry about my record on Public LOD. I have had some technical problems with it 
and still do (my message bodies don't appear on the web site - I though I was 
being censored :-)). I will try to do better in the future.

Dominic







   




 From: Hugh Glaser 
To: Dominic Oldman  
Cc: "public-lod@w3.org community"  
Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 13:47
Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish   opaque 
 HTML pages?
 
Hi Dominic,
Nice when it is the holiday weekend, so we hear from you :-)

On 1 Apr 2013, at 13:19, Dominic Oldman 
wrote:

> 
> 
> For the specific case of the BMs endpoint would the ideal situation be that 
> there is no formal attribution requirement (friction free) but rather some 
> encouraging (but not mandatory) words about embedding at least the URI of the 
> object record in a web publication.
Sounds perfect to me.
Looks like I was wrong about Chris Gutteridge'shttp://data.southampton.ac.uk/ 
license - I'm sure it used to have something like that, but now it is either 
OGL or nothing.
I guess he got the University to formally agree OGL, which is great.
> 
> There is no need for every URI to be included, but the inclusion of the 
> object URI  (a simple matter if you are querying the EndPouint) would provide 
> everything that anyone would need, particularly since every object record is 
> a graph and therefore only the main URI is needed to collect all the triples 
> for an individual object.
Let's try an example.
Perhaps a little contrived, but…
I might decide to produce a statistics site about objects in museums, and for 
the BM used your lovely data to find out about year of acquisition, size, 
weight, age etc., of a significant range (or even all) of your collection.
Let's say I show mean and SD, for example.
This doesn't really conform to the idea of having an "object URI", but clearly 
draws on the graph for every one of them.

Best
Hugh
> 
> It would be good to have some best practice guidelines that general web site 
> developers can reference (and we can reproduce or link to on our sites) when 
> querying triplestores.  
> 
> Dominic
> 
> From: Hugh Glaser 
> To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
> Cc: Kingsley Idehen  
> Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 12:51
> Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque 
> HTML pages?
> 
> These aims are laudable, and are a good objective when possible.
> And I note, Kingsley, that your post talks about "republish the extracted 
> content", and I roughly agree with you. 
> 
> But the wider discussion seems to me to have a very simplistic, if not naive, 
> view of how LOD is used in practice (well, at least compared to the way I use 
> it :-) ).
> A typical page of something like http://apps.seme4.com/see-uk/ (sorry, 
> hardware fault at the moment) or http://www.dotac.info/explorer/ uses many 
> hundreds, or even thousands of RDF documents from hundreds of domains 
> retrieved via URIs.
> The contribution of some documents may be as little as lending weight to an 
> inference that was calculated several years ago, and the document may have 
> long been discarded, and not re-cached.
> Or, of course, it may be an easily identifiable "fact" in the presentation.
> The best I can do is point overall at the domains where we got data 
> (http://www.rkbexplorer.com/data/), in the spirit of attribution.
> A *requirement* to attribute each URI in a system that goes out and gets 
> stuff from the LOD Cloud like that simply means that I have to ignore that 
> entire data source, because I can't realistically satisfy it.
> Actually, maybe I could - an enormous list of every URI we have ever resolved 
> - but somehow I don't think a page with hundreds of millions of URIs on it is 
> very helpful.
> Of course, I could do quite a lot of implementation work to try to track it, 
> but that would have serious computing, storage and communication costs - such 
> provenance data for an rkbexplorer network panel might well h

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Hugh Glaser]

Hi Dominic,
Nice when it is the holiday weekend, so we hear from you :-)

On 1 Apr 2013, at 13:19, Dominic Oldman 
 wrote:

> 
> 
> For the specific case of the BMs endpoint would the ideal situation be that 
> there is no formal attribution requirement (friction free) but rather some 
> encouraging (but not mandatory) words about embedding at least the URI of the 
> object record in a web publication.
Sounds perfect to me.
Looks like I was wrong about Chris Gutteridge's http://data.southampton.ac.uk/ 
license - I'm sure it used to have something like that, but now it is either 
OGL or nothing.
I guess he got the University to formally agree OGL, which is great.
> 
> There is no need for every URI to be included, but the inclusion of the 
> object URI  (a simple matter if you are querying the EndPouint) would provide 
> everything that anyone would need, particularly since every object record is 
> a graph and therefore only the main URI is needed to collect all the triples 
> for an individual object.
Let's try an example.
Perhaps a little contrived, but…
I might decide to produce a statistics site about objects in museums, and for 
the BM used your lovely data to find out about year of acquisition, size, 
weight, age etc., of a significant range (or even all) of your collection.
Let's say I show mean and SD, for example.
This doesn't really conform to the idea of having an "object URI", but clearly 
draws on the graph for every one of them.

Best
Hugh
> 
> It would be good to have some best practice guidelines that general web site 
> developers can reference (and we can reproduce or link to on our sites) when 
> querying triplestores.   
> 
> Dominic
> 
> From: Hugh Glaser 
> To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
> Cc: Kingsley Idehen  
> Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 12:51
> Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque 
> HTML pages?
> 
> These aims are laudable, and are a good objective when possible.
> And I note, Kingsley, that your post talks about "republish the extracted 
> content", and I roughly agree with you. 
> 
> But the wider discussion seems to me to have a very simplistic, if not naive, 
> view of how LOD is used in practice (well, at least compared to the way I use 
> it :-) ).
> A typical page of something like http://apps.seme4.com/see-uk/ (sorry, 
> hardware fault at the moment) or http://www.dotac.info/explorer/ uses many 
> hundreds, or even thousands of RDF documents from hundreds of domains 
> retrieved via URIs.
> The contribution of some documents may be as little as lending weight to an 
> inference that was calculated several years ago, and the document may have 
> long been discarded, and not re-cached.
> Or, of course, it may be an easily identifiable "fact" in the presentation.
> The best I can do is point overall at the domains where we got data 
> (http://www.rkbexplorer.com/data/), in the spirit of attribution.
> A *requirement* to attribute each URI in a system that goes out and gets 
> stuff from the LOD Cloud like that simply means that I have to ignore that 
> entire data source, because I can't realistically satisfy it.
> Actually, maybe I could - an enormous list of every URI we have ever resolved 
> - but somehow I don't think a page with hundreds of millions of URIs on it is 
> very helpful.
> Of course, I could do quite a lot of implementation work to try to track it, 
> but that would have serious computing, storage and communication costs - such 
> provenance data for an rkbexplorer network panel might well have than an 
> order of magnitude more URIs than the panel itself, plus the descriptive 
> overheads (and the receiver would not be very happy with perhaps 50K for 1K 
> of substantive data).
> Actually, in many cases, at the moment, really doing it properly would not be 
> possible, as the RDF data does not in fact have a licence, even if  the web 
> "site" does.
> Again, this is because people seem to have a simplistic view of how LOD data 
> is consumed.
> Remember, it is agents that are doing the retrieval, and that eyeballs never 
> get to see the "site", if there is such a thing.
> Even Jeff's "special cases" clause makes me nervous - the best I can manage 
> in reality is to have a link to the main site.
> (By the way Jeff, in answer to your question of what you might do, you could 
> add licence information to the RDF you return.)
> In practice I try to ensure I block sites that require attribution - if I 
> can't comply with the spirit, never mind the letter, of the publisher's 
> requirements, then I prefer to leave it out.
> 
> So, if a site *requires* attribution, some really interesting sites tha

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Dominic Oldman]

For the specific case of the BMs endpoint would the ideal situation be that 
there is no formal attribution requirement (friction free) but rather some 
encouraging (but not mandatory) words about embedding at least the URI of the 
object record in a web publication.

There is no need for every URI to be included, but the inclusion of the object 
URI  (a simple matter if you are querying the EndPouint) would provide 
everything that anyone would need, particularly since every object record is a 
graph and therefore only the main URI is needed to collect all the triples for 
an individual object.

It would be good to have some best practice guidelines that general web site 
developers can reference (and we can reproduce or link to on our sites) when 
querying triplestores.   


Dominic




 From: Hugh Glaser 
To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
Cc: Kingsley Idehen  
Sent: Monday, 1 April 2013, 12:51
Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish  opaque  
HTML pages?
 
These aims are laudable, and are a good objective when possible.
And I note, Kingsley, that your post talks about "republish the extracted 
content", and I roughly agree with you. 

But the wider discussion seems to me to have a very simplistic, if not naive, 
view of how LOD is used in practice (well, at least compared to the way I use 
it :-) ).
A typical page of something like http://apps.seme4.com/see-uk/ (sorry, hardware 
fault at the moment) or http://www.dotac.info/explorer/ uses many hundreds, or 
even thousands of RDF documents from hundreds of domains retrieved via URIs.
The contribution of some documents may be as little as lending weight to an 
inference that was calculated several years ago, and the document may have long 
been discarded, and not re-cached.
Or, of course, it may be an easily identifiable "fact" in the presentation.
The best I can do is point overall at the domains where we got data 
(http://www.rkbexplorer.com/data/), in the spirit of attribution.
A *requirement* to attribute each URI in a system that goes out and gets stuff 
from the LOD Cloud like that simply means that I have to ignore that entire 
data source, because I can't realistically satisfy it.
Actually, maybe I could - an enormous list of every URI we have ever resolved - 
but somehow I don't think a page with hundreds of millions of URIs on it is 
very helpful.
Of course, I could do quite a lot of implementation work to try to track it, 
but that would have serious computing, storage and communication costs - such 
provenance data for an rkbexplorer network panel might well have than an order 
of magnitude more URIs than the panel itself, plus the descriptive overheads 
(and the receiver would not be very happy with perhaps 50K for 1K of 
substantive data).
Actually, in many cases, at the moment, really doing it properly would not be 
possible, as the RDF data does not in fact have a licence, even if  the web 
"site" does.
Again, this is because people seem to have a simplistic view of how LOD data is 
consumed.
Remember, it is agents that are doing the retrieval, and that eyeballs never 
get to see the "site", if there is such a thing.
Even Jeff's "special cases" clause makes me nervous - the best I can manage in 
reality is to have a link to the main site.
(By the way Jeff, in answer to your question of what you might do, you could 
add licence information to the RDF you return.)
In practice I try to ensure I block sites that require attribution - if I can't 
comply with the spirit, never mind the letter, of the publisher's requirements, 
then I prefer to leave it out.

So, if a site *requires* attribution, some really interesting sites that really 
use the power of Linked Data won't use the data - is that what the publisher 
wanted when they published it?

I do like Chris Gutteridge's data.southampton.ac.uk - please attribute of you 
can, but if you really, really can't, then still feel free to use my beautiful 
data.

Good discussion.
Hugh

On 30 Mar 2013, at 14:35, Kingsley Idehen  wrote:

> All,
> 
> " Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a 
> half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference 
> for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the 
> ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].
> 
> An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
> Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.
> 
> It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents 
> based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.
> 
> It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such as 
> the LOD cloud and then republish

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Hugh Glaser]

These aims are laudable, and are a good objective when possible.
And I note, Kingsley, that your post talks about "republish the extracted 
content", and I roughly agree with you. 

But the wider discussion seems to me to have a very simplistic, if not naive, 
view of how LOD is used in practice (well, at least compared to the way I use 
it :-) ).
A typical page of something like http://apps.seme4.com/see-uk/ (sorry, hardware 
fault at the moment) or http://www.dotac.info/explorer/ uses many hundreds, or 
even thousands of RDF documents from hundreds of domains retrieved via URIs.
The contribution of some documents may be as little as lending weight to an 
inference that was calculated several years ago, and the document may have long 
been discarded, and not re-cached.
Or, of course, it may be an easily identifiable "fact" in the presentation.
The best I can do is point overall at the domains where we got data 
(http://www.rkbexplorer.com/data/), in the spirit of attribution.
A *requirement* to attribute each URI in a system that goes out and gets stuff 
from the LOD Cloud like that simply means that I have to ignore that entire 
data source, because I can't realistically satisfy it.
Actually, maybe I could - an enormous list of every URI we have ever resolved - 
but somehow I don't think a page with hundreds of millions of URIs on it is 
very helpful.
Of course, I could do quite a lot of implementation work to try to track it, 
but that would have serious computing, storage and communication costs - such 
provenance data for an rkbexplorer network panel might well have than an order 
of magnitude more URIs than the panel itself, plus the descriptive overheads 
(and the receiver would not be very happy with perhaps 50K for 1K of 
substantive data).
Actually, in many cases, at the moment, really doing it properly would not be 
possible, as the RDF data does not in fact have a licence, even if  the web 
"site" does.
Again, this is because people seem to have a simplistic view of how LOD data is 
consumed.
Remember, it is agents that are doing the retrieval, and that eyeballs never 
get to see the "site", if there is such a thing.
Even Jeff's "special cases" clause makes me nervous - the best I can manage in 
reality is to have a link to the main site.
(By the way Jeff, in answer to your question of what you might do, you could 
add licence information to the RDF you return.)
In practice I try to ensure I block sites that require attribution - if I can't 
comply with the spirit, never mind the letter, of the publisher's requirements, 
then I prefer to leave it out.

So, if a site *requires* attribution, some really interesting sites that really 
use the power of Linked Data won't use the data - is that what the publisher 
wanted when they published it?

I do like Chris Gutteridge's data.southampton.ac.uk - please attribute of you 
can, but if you really, really can't, then still feel free to use my beautiful 
data.

Good discussion.
Hugh

On 30 Mar 2013, at 14:35, Kingsley Idehen  wrote:

> All,
> 
> " Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a 
> half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference 
> for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the 
> ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].
> 
> An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
> Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.
> 
> It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents 
> based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.
> 
> It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such as 
> the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML documents, 
> where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or 
> machines.
> 
> The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations and 
> source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked Data 
> URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .
> 
> Links:
> 
> 1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- 
> ontolog list post .
> 
> -- 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Kingsley Idehen   
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Kingsley Idehen]

On 3/31/13 2:54 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:


All the CC-BY licenses require attribution in the a manner specified 
by the licensor. What needs to be done is that if you release work 
under a CC license you should specify that you consider the work 
properly attributed if the licensee includes the original uri in their 
publications.,


The SA provision doesn't address the issue of how attribution is made. 
Rather it stipulates that works that build upon a so licensed source 
need to be themselves licensed in the same way. I'm not personally a 
fan of this provision, but I understand it may be useful in selected 
situations.


Finally, it should be noted that you can only use a CC license if you 
actually have some copy rights in the material you are releasing. In 
the US, if the material is factual data , then it is not something 
that can be copyrighted. And if you are producing LOD transliterations 
of existing resources, you can't slap on a CC license unless the 
source material is licensed in a manner that gives you the right to do 
so (google my discussion of the license we see on linkedct.org 
<http://linkedct.org> if you are curious about this aspect.)


So licensing will only go so far.

If people care about this, and I agree with Kingsley that they should, 
they should consider articulating their views and including those 
descriptions - not legally binding, but establishing a community norm 
- in linked data they publish. Aggregators, reviewers,  search tools, 
users of linked data should pay attention to uses to check  and make 
(public) noise when those norms are flouted. Tutorials and Courses 
that teach about how to make linked data should include education 
about these norms.


In academia, citation is not mandated by license or law, but by norms, 
and it is pretty darned effective. it could become the case that norms 
are similarly effective in the lod community.




+1000...


Kingsley


Alan

On Mar 31, 2013 1:20 PM, "Kingsley Idehen" <mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>> wrote:


On 3/31/13 7:42 AM, Dominic wrote:



Should this be stipulated as part of a license agreement?


CC-BY-SA is an example of such a license.

Kingsley


Dominic



*From:* Kingsley Idehen 
<mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>
*To:* "public-lod@w3.org" <mailto:public-lod@w3.org>
 <mailto:public-lod@w3.org>
    *Sent:* Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
    *Subject:* Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and
publish opaque HTML pages?

All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it
isn't a half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it
provides a reference for anybody who wants to dig into the
subject, and (c) it shows where the ideas originated and how
they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].

An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution
mechanism. Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power
increases exponentially.

It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML
documents based on source data modulo discoverable original
sources Linked Data URIs.

It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from
sources such as the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted
content using HTML documents, where the original source Linked
Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or machines.

The academic community has always had a very strong regard for
citations and source references. Thus, there's no reason why the
utility of Linked Data URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this
best-practice, at Web-scale .

Links:

1.
http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html
-- ontolog list post .

-- 
Regards,


Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com <http://www.openlinksw.com/>
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/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  
<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile:https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/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/bl

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Alan Ruttenberg]

All the CC-BY licenses require attribution in the a manner specified by the
licensor. What needs to be done is that if you release work under a CC
license you should specify that you consider the work properly attributed
if the licensee includes the original uri in their publications.,

The SA provision doesn't address the issue of how attribution is made.
Rather it stipulates that works that build upon a so licensed source need
to be themselves licensed in the same way. I'm not personally a fan of this
provision, but I understand it may be useful in selected situations.

Finally, it should be noted that you can only use a CC license if you
actually have some copy rights in the material you are releasing. In the
US, if the material is factual data , then it is not something that can be
copyrighted. And if you are producing LOD transliterations of existing
resources, you can't slap on a CC license unless the source material is
licensed in a manner that gives you the right to do so (google my
discussion of the license we see on linkedct.org if you are curious about
this aspect.)

So licensing will only go so far.

If people care about this, and I agree with Kingsley that they should, they
should consider articulating their views and including those descriptions -
not legally binding, but establishing a community norm - in linked data
they publish. Aggregators, reviewers,  search tools, users of linked data
should pay attention to uses to check  and make (public) noise when those
norms are flouted. Tutorials and Courses that teach about how to make
linked data should include education about these norms.

In academia, citation is not mandated by license or law, but by norms, and
it is pretty darned effective. it could become the case that norms are
similarly effective in the lod community.

Alan
On Mar 31, 2013 1:20 PM, "Kingsley Idehen"  wrote:

>  On 3/31/13 7:42 AM, Dominic wrote:
>
>
>
>  Should this be stipulated as part of a license agreement?
>
>
> CC-BY-SA is an example of such a license.
>
> Kingsley
>
>
>  Dominic
>
>
>--
> *From:* Kingsley Idehen  
> *To:* "public-lod@w3.org"  
> 
> *Sent:* Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
> *Subject:* Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish
> opaque HTML pages?
>
> All,
>
> " Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a
> half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference
> for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the
> ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].
>
> An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism.
> Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.
>
> It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents
> based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.
>
> It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such
> as the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML
> documents, where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable
> by humans or machines.
>
> The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations
> and source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked
> Data URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .
>
> Links:
>
> 1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html --
> ontolog list post .
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/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/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Dominic Oldman]

Just to expand this.

- Having as few conditions as possible facilitates the use of linked 
data. By not having to think about conditions linked data can work more 
freely - as it is meant to.

Aggregators such as Europeana have (where possible) gone for CC0 to create a 
friction free service.

Many people reusing Museum linked data will cite the source anyway because it 
gives some authority to the data they use.  


It would be extremely helpful if web sites included the URI sources for 
the data they use (in the same way that they might include a URL) so 
that people can see the source and providers can use the information to 
improve their data. Providing the URIs is very beneficial and is 
relatively easy to include in any reuse code (if people are developing 
against an EndPoint to create a web site then including the main URI of 
the data in the source is not onerus).

How do we encourage good practice in this area?

D






 From: Kingsley Idehen 
To: public-lod@w3.org 
Sent: Sunday, 31 March 2013, 18:17
Subject: Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque   
HTML pages?
 

On 3/31/13 7:42 AM, Dominic wrote:


>
>
>
>Should this be stipulated as part of a license agreement?
CC-BY-SA is an example of such a license. 

Kingsley 


>
>Dominic
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Kingsley Idehen 
>To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
>Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
>Subject: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML 
>pages?
> 
>All,
>
>" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows
that it isn't a half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin
air, (b) it provides a reference for anybody who wants to
dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the ideas
originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F.
Sowa [1].
>
>An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and
attribution mechanism. Incorporate Linked Data principles
and the power increases exponentially.
>
>It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish
HTML documents based on source data modulo discoverable
original sources Linked Data URIs.
>
>It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data
from sources such as the LOD cloud and then republish the
extracted content using HTML documents, where the original
source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or
machines.
>
>The academic community has always had a very strong regard
for citations and source references. Thus, there's no reason
why the utility of Linked Data URIs shouldn't be used to
reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .
>
>Links:
>
>1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- 
>ontolog list post .
>
>-- 
>Regards,
>
>Kingsley Idehen    
>Founder & CEO
>OpenLink Software
>Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
>Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/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/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn 
Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen 

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Kingsley Idehen]

On 3/31/13 11:23 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:

I disagree. LOD is about linking to more information. Carrying URIs helps 
serendipitous downstream consumers. This isn't merely attribution.


+1000...

Kingsley


Jeff

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 31, 2013, at 10:53 AM, "Michael Brunnbauer"  wrote:


Hello Dominic,

On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 02:57:38PM +0100, Dominic Oldman wrote:

I had a question about licensing. Should licenses try to get web publishers to 
embed original URIs into web implementations - a sort of invisible attribution 
- where practical, and
is this practical and/or desirable.

My answer to this is a clear no. This would be turning the visions of this
community into a religion and enforcing it on others. LOD should be seen as
a means to solve practical problems and not as an end.

Regards,

Michael Brunnbauer

--
++  Michael Brunnbauer
++  netEstate GmbH
++  Geisenhausener Straße 11a
++  81379 München
++  Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
++  Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89
++  E-Mail bru...@netestate.de
++  http://www.netestate.de/
++
++  Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
++  USt-IdNr. DE221033342
++  Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
++  Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel





--

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Kingsley Idehen]

On 3/31/13 7:42 AM, Dominic wrote:



Should this be stipulated as part of a license agreement?


CC-BY-SA is an example of such a license.

Kingsley


Dominic



*From:* Kingsley Idehen 
*To:* "public-lod@w3.org" 
*Sent:* Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
*Subject:* Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish 
opaque HTML pages?


All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it 
isn't a half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides 
a reference for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it 
shows where the ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- 
John F. Sowa [1].


An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution 
mechanism. Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases 
exponentially.


It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML 
documents based on source data modulo discoverable original sources 
Linked Data URIs.


It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources 
such as the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using 
HTML documents, where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't 
undiscoverable by humans or machines.


The academic community has always had a very strong regard for 
citations and source references. Thus, there's no reason why the 
utility of Linked Data URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this 
best-practice, at Web-scale .


Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html 
-- ontolog list post .


--
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com <http://www.openlinksw.com/>
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen 
<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>

Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/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/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen






smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Young,Jeff (OR)]

I disagree. LOD is about linking to more information. Carrying URIs helps 
serendipitous downstream consumers. This isn't merely attribution.

Jeff

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 31, 2013, at 10:53 AM, "Michael Brunnbauer"  wrote:

> 
> Hello Dominic,
> 
> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 02:57:38PM +0100, Dominic Oldman wrote:
>> I had a question about licensing. Should licenses try to get web publishers 
>> to embed original URIs into web implementations - a sort of invisible 
>> attribution - where practical, and 
>> is this practical and/or desirable. 
> 
> My answer to this is a clear no. This would be turning the visions of this
> community into a religion and enforcing it on others. LOD should be seen as
> a means to solve practical problems and not as an end.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Michael Brunnbauer
> 
> -- 
> ++  Michael Brunnbauer
> ++  netEstate GmbH
> ++  Geisenhausener Straße 11a
> ++  81379 München
> ++  Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
> ++  Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 
> ++  E-Mail bru...@netestate.de
> ++  http://www.netestate.de/
> ++
> ++  Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
> ++  USt-IdNr. DE221033342
> ++  Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
> ++  Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel
> 
> 

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Michael Brunnbauer]

Hello Dominic,

On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 02:57:38PM +0100, Dominic Oldman wrote:
> I had a question about licensing. Should licenses try to get web publishers 
> to embed original URIs into web implementations - a sort of invisible 
> attribution - where practical, and 
> is this practical and/or desirable. 

My answer to this is a clear no. This would be turning the visions of this
community into a religion and enforcing it on others. LOD should be seen as
a means to solve practical problems and not as an end.

Regards,

Michael Brunnbauer

-- 
++  Michael Brunnbauer
++  netEstate GmbH
++  Geisenhausener Straße 11a
++  81379 München
++  Tel +49 89 32 19 77 80
++  Fax +49 89 32 19 77 89 
++  E-Mail bru...@netestate.de
++  http://www.netestate.de/
++
++  Sitz: München, HRB Nr.142452 (Handelsregister B München)
++  USt-IdNr. DE221033342
++  Geschäftsführer: Michael Brunnbauer, Franz Brunnbauer
++  Prokurist: Dipl. Kfm. (Univ.) Markus Hendel

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Young,Jeff (OR)]

We use ODC-By with a "special cases" clause for some of our datasets to account 
for Linked Data situations. Thoughts and comments about this approach would be 
welcome. 

http://purl.oclc.org/dataset/WorldCat
http://viaf.org/viaf/data

Jeff

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 31, 2013, at 10:00 AM, "Dominic Oldman"  wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> Sorry, the body of my last message didn't seem to appear on the list.
> 
> I had a question about licensing. Should licenses try to get web publishers 
> to embed original URIs into web implementations - a sort of invisible 
> attribution - where practical, and is this practical and/or desirable. 
> 
> There is another reason for including URIs which might not be considered in 
> the Academy. It allows knowledge organisations to see how its knowledge is 
> being enriched and provide options for bringing it back into the original 
> information system infrastructures so it can be preserved - a sort of mega 
> and indirect crowd sourcing but across the Internet rather than any 
> particular web site.
> 
> If I publish a cuneiform data record and it is reused in different projects 
> and applications, and the data is enriched with annotations, corrections, 
> additions etc., if the original URI is embedded, I can harvest this 
> information and enrich the object record against the original URI so that 
> subsequent users (including our own researchers and audiences) benefit by 
> this continual community improvement. This is one of the objectives of the 
> ResearchSpace project - to encourage enrichment against institutional URIs so 
> that research projects (which are temporary and are limited in the way that 
> they give back to the community) have a more permanent and long lasting 
> legacy. 
> 
> Dominic
> 
> From: Kingsley Idehen 
> To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
> Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
> Subject: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque 
> HTML pages?
> 
> All,
> 
> " Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a 
> half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference 
> for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the 
> ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].
> 
> An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
> Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.
> 
> It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents 
> based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.
> 
> It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such as 
> the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML documents, 
> where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or 
> machines.
> 
> The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations and 
> source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked Data 
> URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .
> 
> Links:
> 
> 1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- 
> ontolog list post .
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> 
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Dominic Oldman]

All,

Sorry, the body of my last message didn't seem to appear on the list.

I had a question about licensing. Should licenses try to get web publishers to 
embed original URIs into web implementations - a sort of invisible attribution 
- where practical, and 
is this practical and/or desirable. 

There is another reason for including URIs which might not be considered in the 
Academy. It allows knowledge organisations to 
see how its knowledge is being enriched and provide options for bringing it 
back into the original information system infrastructures so it can be 
preserved - a sort of mega and indirect crowd sourcing but across the Internet 
rather than any particular web site.

If I publish a cuneiform data record and it is reused in different projects and 
applications, and the data is enriched with annotations, corrections, additions 
etc., if the original URI is embedded, I can harvest this information and 
enrich the object record against the original URI so that subsequent users 
(including our own researchers and audiences) benefit by this continual 
community improvement. This is one of the objectives of the ResearchSpace 
project - to encourage enrichment against institutional URIs so that research 
projects (which are temporary and are limited in the way that they give back to 
the community) have a more permanent and long lasting legacy. 


Dominic



 From: Kingsley Idehen 
To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
Subject: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque  HTML 
pages?
 
All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a 
half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference for 
anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the ideas 
originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].

An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.

It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents 
based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.

It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such as 
the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML documents, 
where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or 
machines.

The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations and 
source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked Data URIs 
shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .

Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- ontolog 
list post .

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen    
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Dominic]

Should this be stipulated as part of a license agreement?

Dominic





 From: Kingsley Idehen 
To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
Sent: Saturday, 30 March 2013, 14:35
Subject: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque  HTML 
pages?
 
All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a 
half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference for 
anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the ideas 
originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].

An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.

It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents 
based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.

It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such as 
the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML documents, 
where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or 
machines.

The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations and 
source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked Data URIs 
shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .

Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- ontolog 
list post .

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen    
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Paul Groth]

Hi Kingsley, all:

This is an important subject. Thanks for bringing it up.

W3C Prov [1] provides helpful constructs for providing just such
attribution in linked data. In particular, ways to denote attribution
(prov:wasAttributedTo), derivation (prov:wasDerivedFrom), quotation
(prov:wasQuotedFrom), and the original source of information
(prov:hadPrimarySource).

We also provide mechanisms for discovering provenance using standard web
mechanisms for resource's on the web [2]

We hope that these constructs and mechanisms help make it easier for people
to expose attribution information in a structured way and give credit where
credit is due.

regards
Paul



[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-primer/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-aq/


On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:

> All,
>
> " Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a
> half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference
> for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the
> ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].
>
> An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism.
> Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.
>
> It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents
> based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.
>
> It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such
> as the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML
> documents, where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable
> by humans or machines.
>
> The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations
> and source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked
> Data URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .
>
> Links:
>
> 1. 
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/**ontolog-forum/2013-03/**msg00084.html--
>  ontolog list post .
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: 
> http://www.openlinksw.com/**blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: 
> https://plus.google.com/**112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: 
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/**kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
--
Dr. Paul Groth (p.t.gr...@vu.nl)
http://www.few.vu.nl/~pgroth/
Assistant Professor
- Knowledge Representation & Reasoning Group |
  Artificial Intelligence Section | Department of Computer Science
- The Network Institute
VU University Amsterdam

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Gannon Dick]

+1 verified, maybe a lot more if people took this advice :-)





 From: Kingsley Idehen 
To: "public-lod@w3.org"  
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 9:35 AM
Subject: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque  HTML 
pages?
 
All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't a 
half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a reference for 
anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it shows where the ideas 
originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- John F. Sowa [1].

An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.

It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML documents 
based on source data modulo discoverable original sources Linked Data URIs.

It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources such as 
the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using HTML documents, 
where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't undiscoverable by humans or 
machines.

The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations and 
source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked Data URIs 
shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .

Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- ontolog 
list post .

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen    
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen

Re: Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Barry Norton]

Glad to say that a large national broadcaster is moving towards good 
practice on this score.


Barry


On 30/03/13 14:35, Kingsley Idehen wrote:

All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it 
isn't a half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides 
a reference for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it 
shows where the ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- 
John F. Sowa [1].


An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution 
mechanism. Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases 
exponentially.


It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML 
documents based on source data modulo discoverable original sources 
Linked Data URIs.


It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources 
such as the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using 
HTML documents, where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't 
undiscoverable by humans or machines.


The academic community has always had a very strong regard for 
citations and source references. Thus, there's no reason why the 
utility of Linked Data URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this 
best-practice, at Web-scale .


Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html 
-- ontolog list post .

Why is it bad practice to consume Linked Data and publish opaque HTML pages?

[Kingsley Idehen]

All,

" Citing sources is useful for many reasons: (a) it shows that it isn't 
a half-baked idea I just pulled out of thin air, (b) it provides a 
reference for anybody who wants to dig into the subject, and (c) it 
shows where the ideas originated and how they're likely to evolve." -- 
John F. Sowa [1].


An HTTP URI is an extremely powerful citation and attribution mechanism. 
Incorporate Linked Data principles and the power increases exponentially.


It is okay to consume Linked Data from wherever and publish HTML 
documents based on source data modulo discoverable original sources 
Linked Data URIs.


It isn't okay, to consume publicly available Linked Data from sources 
such as the LOD cloud and then republish the extracted content using 
HTML documents, where the original source Linked Data URIs aren't 
undiscoverable by humans or machines.


The academic community has always had a very strong regard for citations 
and source references. Thus, there's no reason why the utility of Linked 
Data URIs shouldn't be used to reinforce this best-practice, at Web-scale .


Links:

1. http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/2013-03/msg00084.html -- 
ontolog list post .


--

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen







smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature