[foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] FOAF sites offline during cleanup
steve.harris at garlik.com
Tue Apr 28 11:27:20 CEST 2009
On 27 Apr 2009, at 20:10, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> Steve Harris wrote:
>> On 27 Apr 2009, at 14:26, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>>>> I would safely say re. LOD Cloud somewhere north of 80% :-) And
>>>>> primary due to the content coming from PingTheSemanticWeb,
>>>>> I would say 90% and higher. The "Linked Data" meme has always
>>>>> encouraged URIs for everything.
>>>> I guess it depends whether you count your population by triples or
>>>> graphs, but that seems quite high to me. The vast majority of FOAF
>>>> data (Hi5 and LiveJournal, for example) has bnodes in it, and FOAF
>>>> makes up the bulk of LinkedData as far as I've been able to tell.
>>> No, the FOAF data with bnodes in the LOD cloud come from the places
>>> you've just mentioned via PingTheSemanticWeb (PTSW) and other
>>> built from PTSW, or those that performed similar RDF crawling.
>> My reading of your sentence above was that you were including PTSW,
>> and in any case if you don't not crawl how can you ever get to see
>> a reasonable slice of the LOD?
> I was referring to the data sets in the LOD cloud bubble that we've
> loaded into the instance at: http://lod.openlinksw.com (which does
> include stuff from PTSW but placed into its own Named Graph Group).
> Think warehouse just for this conversation.
Sure, but that cloud diagram includes FOAF, and something like 99% of
FOAF files include bNodes. I don't know what proportion of the LOD
web is FOAF, but it must be around 50%.
The "Linked" part of the name implies that crawling is a valid tactic
to gather the data to me.
More information about the foaf-dev