Term-based thesauri and SKOS (Part 4): Change ... This is the fourth in a series of posts (previously: part 1, part 2, part 3) on making a thesaurus available as linked data using the SKOS and SKOS-XL RDF vocabularies.
In the previous post, I examined some of the ways the thesaurus can change over time, and problems that arose with my proposed mapping to RDF. Here I'll outline one potential solution to those problems. The last three cases I described in the previous post, where an existing preferred term loses that status and is "relegated" to a non-preferred term, all present a problem for my suggested simple mapping, because the URI for a concept disappears from the generated RDF graph - and this creates a conflict with the principles of URI stability and reliability I advocated at the start of that post.
My first thoughts on a solution circled around generating concept URIs, not just for the preferred term, but also for all the non-preferred terms, and using owl:sameAs (or skos:exactMatch?) @prefix rdfs: < . @prefix rdfs: < . Summary. Rdfppt. Extensible use of RDF in a Business Context. Kerstin Forsberg, Viktoria Institute and Adera, O Hamngatan 41-43, S-411 10 Gothenburg Sweden, kerstin.forsberg@aderagroup.com Lars Dannstedt, Volvo Information Technology, Web Program Center, S-405 08, Gothenburg Sweden, it1.larsd@memo.volvo.se Abstract The next generation of intranets should facilitate the structuring of information as well as the organising of communication in networking organisations.
For many organisations, one step in that direction is to structure information by adding metadata. We have encountered problems when applying Dublin Core, a metadata element set developed for discovery of existing information resources on the public Internet, on an extensive intranet. Keywords: Metadata, RDF, XML, Intranet 1. The first generation of intranets provided easy access to large amount of information using (hyper)links. The introduction of XML (eXtensible Markup Language) will make information self-describing [2] and facilitate information discovering. The RDF Database Market—Clark & Parsia: Thinking Clearly. Update: Stardog is our entry into the commercial RDF database market. There’s plenty of talk about the purely technical aspects of RDF databases but considerably less talk about the RDF database market as a commercial software business. As I see it, the commercial RDF database market contains at least seven systems, listed here in random order: There are another 8 to 10 technically viable RDF databases available.
However, I want to talk about these seven systems as comprising the commercial market, by which I mean systems that satisfy two conditions: first, they are production-ready; and, second, they are commercially licensed (that is, you have to pay money to use them). A weaker version of the latter condition, which I’m happy with, is just that there is a single entity which owns the system (i.e., they are not community-owned) and that entity is commercial (i.e., profit-seeking) in nature. Most of these systems have a zero-cost version or are open-source licensed. No Pure Plays. COI - Introduction to linked data. The Growth of Linked Data - ReadWriteCloud. Linking bbc.co.uk to the Linked Data cloud « Derivadow.com.
I’ve been doing a few talks recently – most recently at the somewhat confused OKCon (Open Knowledge) Conference.
The audience was extremely diverse and so I tried to not only talk about what we’ve done but also introduce the concept of Linked Data and explain what it is. Linked Data is a grassroots project to use web technologies to expose data on the web. It is for many people synonymous with the semantic web – and while this isn’t quite true. It does, as far as I’m concerned, represent a very large subset of the semantic web project. Interestingly, it can also be thought of as the ‘the web done right’, the web as it was originally designed to be. But what is it? Well it can be described with 4 simple rules. How Repositories Can Contribute Linked Data. I've been working a lot with our repository and Linked Data teams (thanks to Hugh Glaser, Nick Gibbins and Iain Millard) on the JISC dotAC project.
One of the great things about that project has been the opportunity to really get our heads around the role of repositories in the Semantic Web and the Linked data world. Now that the project has finished, I've finally had the opportunity to sit down with Chris Gutteridge and braindump our understanding so far.
The following is a description of how EPrints (v3.2 beta) exports its holdings as Linked Data. It all comes down to how it uses and resolves URIs. (Like it says at the bottom of this posting, please send us comments!) We ASSIGN a URI to all the significant entities that the repository owns: specifically, eprint, document, file, user, and "subject taxonomy" objects. We MINT (or COIN) a URI for entites whose existence we infer from metadata. Does this look sensible? How to publish Linked Data on the Web.
This document provides a tutorial on how to publish Linked Data on the Web.
After a general overview of the concept of Linked Data, we describe several practical recipes for publishing information as Linked Data on the Web. This tutorial has been superseeded by the book Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space written by Tom Heath and Christian Bizer. This tutorial was published in 2007 and is still online for historical reasons. The Linked Data book was published in 2011 and provides a more detailed and up-to-date introduction into Linked Data. Linked Data - Connect Distributed Data across the Web.