I'd like to step in here and add my 2 cents. My background in this is
that of have started a company that produced a knowledgebase
aggregation. We were a bit early to take advantage of most of the
semantic web technologies, but we definitely made use of a lot of the
early intellectual found
Ian Davis wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Kingsley Idehen
mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
The NYT, London Times, and others of this ilk, are more likely to
contribute their quality data to the LOD cloud if they know there
is a vehicle (e.g., a license scheme) that ens
2009/6/25 Ian Davis :
> I think the onus is on the consumer to ensure they abide with the supplier's
> wishes, not the other way round. It's really a matter or respect and
> politeness to give people the credit they ask for.
Certainly in principle, but the supplier should know what they are
doing
Ian Davis wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Kingsley Idehen
mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
I stand by my position, we are adhering to their terms.
What they seek is de-referencable via their URIs which remain in
scope at both the data presentation and representation l
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> The NYT, London Times, and others of this ilk, are more likely to
> contribute their quality data to the LOD cloud if they know there is a
> vehicle (e.g., a license scheme) that ensures their HTTP URIs are protected
> i.e., always accessib
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>
> I stand by my position, we are adhering to their terms.
> What they seek is de-referencable via their URIs which remain in scope at
> both the data presentation and representation layers.
>
> I am sure Jamie and the folks at Freebase are
Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
Kingsley,
Encouraging attribution by URI is a bad idea because it encourages
people or organizations to create URIs where perfectly good ones
exist, solely so that they can get their "attribution". Were this no
cost, I wouldn't mind. But having more than one URI for a r
Kingsley,
Encouraging attribution by URI is a bad idea because it encourages people or
organizations to create URIs where perfectly good ones exist, solely so that
they can get their "attribution". Were this no cost, I wouldn't mind. But
having more than one URI for a resource causes real trouble f
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
To save time etc..
What is the URI of a license that effectively enables data publishers to
express and enforce how they are attributed? Wha
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>
>> Leigh Dodds wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> 2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
>>>
To save time etc..
What is the URI of a license that effectively enables data publishers to
express and enforce how they are attributed? Wh
Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
To save time etc..
What is the URI of a license that effectively enables data
publishers to
express and enforce how they are attributed? Whatever that is I am
happy
with. Whatever that is will be vital to attracting
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
To save time etc..
What is the URI of a license that effectively enables data publishers to
express and enforce how they are attributed? Whatever that is I am happy
with. Whatever that is will be vital to attracting curators of high quality
Ian Davis wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Kingsley Idehen
mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for
CC-BY-SA. Hence the transcopyright reference :-)
I want Linked Data to have its GPL equivalent; a license scheme tha
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
> To save time etc..
>
> What is the URI of a license that effectively enables data publishers to
> express and enforce how they are attributed? Whatever that is I am happy
> with. Whatever that is will be vital to attracting curators of high quality
> data to the L
Leigh Dodds wrote:
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for CC-BY-SA. Hence
the transcopyright reference :-)
Unfortunately your preference doesn't actually it make it legally
applicable to data and databases.
The problem, as I see it, a
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
> My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for CC-BY-SA. Hence
> the transcopyright reference :-)
Unfortunately your preference doesn't actually it make it legally
applicable to data and databases. The problem, as I see it, at the
moment is that this is
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> My comments are still fundamentally about my preference for CC-BY-SA.
> Hence the transcopyright reference :-)
>
> I want Linked Data to have its GPL equivalent; a license scheme that:
Have you read the licenses at http://opendatacommons
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
When you publish said data as Linked Data you will be using an HTTP URI, and
in doing so there is implicit attribution.
If you retain the URIs of the source, or make explicit claims (e.g.,
dc:source) that expose the original data sources the
Hi,
2009/6/24 Kingsley Idehen :
> When you publish said data as Linked Data you will be using an HTTP URI, and
> in doing so there is implicit attribution.
> If you retain the URIs of the source, or make explicit claims (e.g.,
> dc:source) that expose the original data sources then everything is f
Leigh Dodds wrote:
Hi,
2009/6/24 Ian Davis :
But your URIs conveys your point of view. The important thing here is that
their is a route back to your data space; the place from which your point of
view originates.
If the pathways to the origins of data are obscured we are recreating
yesterd
Ian Davis wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:00 AM, Kingsley Idehen
mailto:kide...@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
There will be dozens or hundreds of other documents that use
the same URI and the owners of those datasets would like
attribution for their work. For example, I can
Ivan, two words : more python!
2009/6/24 :
> Ivan
>
> Thanks very much. I'll take a look at your python scripts, which should be
> very useful.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
> Van: Ivan Herman [mailto:i...@w3.org]
> Verzonden: wo 24-6-2009 9:14
> Aan: Bill Roberts
> CC:
Ivan
Thanks very much. I'll take a look at your python scripts, which should be
very useful.
Cheers
Bill
Van: Ivan Herman [mailto:i...@w3.org]
Verzonden: wo 24-6-2009 9:14
Aan: Bill Roberts
CC: public-lod@w3.org
Onderwerp: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content
Hi Jonathan
CKAN is a great and clean resource I was not aware of. Shame on me!
BTW just corrected the package http://www.ckan.net/package/read/lingvoj
which was written *linkvoj*.
Actually that was a great typo, I should have thought of it when
creating the resource, too late now, cool URIs do
On Jun 23, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Peter Ansell wrote:
Interestingly, there is a large economy involved with patenting gene
sequences. Aren't they facts also? Why is patenting different to
copyright in this respect?
It isn't. I don't know of any gene sequence patent that was just that
and wit
2009/6/24 Ivan Herman :
> Unfortunately, no:-(
concise, but to the point, thanks :)
--
http://danny.ayers.name
While we could have countless arguments over the appropriateness of DL
(or OWL 2) in the Web environment, the bottom line is whether or not
owl:imports adds useful information - seems hard to see a problem with
that, whether agents can reason or not. The "follow your nose" thing.
What's the problem
Hi,
2009/6/24 Ian Davis :
>> But your URIs conveys your point of view. The important thing here is that
>> their is a route back to your data space; the place from which your point of
>> view originates.
>>
>> If the pathways to the origins of data are obscured we are recreating
>> yesterday's eco
On 24 Jun 2009, at 00:04, Peter Ansell wrote:
2009/6/24 Ian Davis
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Kingsley Idehen > wrote:
Using licensing to ensure the data providers URIs are always
preserved delivers low cost and implicit attribution. This is what I
believe CC-BY-SA delivers. There
Danny Ayers wrote:
> 2009/6/24 Ivan Herman :
>
> With the
>> increasing popularity of RDFa our system guys have already complained
>> about sudden server request surges on that service. Ie, although it is
>> fine to use the service as it is in the .htaccess example (with full
>> URI-s, though)
Hi,
2009/6/23 Kingsley Idehen :
> All,
>
> As you may have noticed, AWS still haven't made the LOD cloud data sets --
> that I submitted eons ago -- public. Basically, the hold-up comes down to
> discomfort with the lack of license clarity re. some of the data sets.
Yes, this is an issue that Am
2009/6/24 Ivan Herman :
With the
> increasing popularity of RDFa our system guys have already complained
> about sudden server request surges on that service. Ie, although it is
> fine to use the service as it is in the .htaccess example (with full
> URI-s, though) if you (or anybody else) uses i
Thank you for the excellent questions, Bill.
Right now IMHO the best bet is probably just to pick whichever format
you are most comfortable with (yup "it depends") and use that as the
single source, transforming perhaps with scripts to generate the
alternate representations for conneg.
As far as
Bill,
a while ago I wrote a blog on how I do it on the Semantic Web Activity
home page:
http://www.w3.org/QA/2008/05/using_rdfa_to_add_information.html
the blog is from the early days of RDFa, some of the specific issues may
be different today (see below), but the overall line, I believe, works
34 matches
Mail list logo
