[foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols] FOAF sites offline during cleanup

Kingsley Idehen kidehen at openlinksw.com
Wed Apr 29 03:31:22 CEST 2009

Peter Williams wrote:
> almost incomprehensible - to the layman. But, I believed you - to about 51%.
The LOD-Cloud pictorials:

1. http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/pub/lod-datasets_2009-03-27.html


1. The black and white clickable version does really group the bubbles
2.  Neither pictorial provides clarity as to what's constructed from 
physical RDF dumps (as per LOD community best practices), "on the fly" 
RDFization, or Progressive Crawling.

Thus, when I say: we have a Virtuoso instance hosting the LOD-Cloud [1], 
someone can always come along an question the accuracy of the claim (as 
Hugh has just done).

In anticipation of the problem I describe above, I sought to partition 
the LOD-Cloud along the following lines: Warehouse (stuff loaded from 
dumps) and Dynamic (RDFized Data). Then I could say with accuracy, bar 
inadvertent omission, that we have an instance hosting the Warehouse 
component of the LOD-Cloud.

Hugh: So to be precise, we are claiming to host the LOD-Cloud Warehouse 
:-) The Graph Group IRIs used in the VoiD graph [2] reflect most of the 
partitioning you see in the colored pictorial re. the stuff available as 
Linking Open Data community dumps [3][4].


1. http://lod.openinksw.com
2. http://lod.openlinksw.com/void/Dataset
3. http://esw.w3.org/topic/DataSetRDFDumps
4. http://esw.w3.org/topic/HCLSIG/LODD/Data


> ________________________________________
> From: foaf-dev-bounces at lists.foaf-project.org [foaf-dev-bounces at lists.foaf-project.org] On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen [kidehen at openlinksw.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 5:16 PM
> To: Hugh Glaser
> Cc: Semantic Web; foaf-dev Friend of a
> Subject: Re: [foaf-dev] [foaf-protocols]  FOAF sites offline during cleanup
> Hugh Glaser wrote:
>> Hi Kingsley.
>> It is great for people to be able to find a lot of the LOD cloud at your site, but please be careful about your claims concerning the data you have crawled from LOD.
>> To say "our actual VoiD graph for LOD cloud" is to mislead readers into thinking that it captures more than it does.
> Yes, and No.
> Remember, I did try to partition the LOD-Cloud by Warehouse,
> Sponged/RDFized, and Crawled, but nobody would have it.
> What we have right now is the LOD-Cloud Warehouse. Also note, when you
> look at the VoiD graph you are seeing Graph Group IRIs (containers of
> Graphs that contain Triples), so you need to drill down a level or two.
> Also, if you feel a dataset dump is missing from the LOD-Cloud
> pictorial, please don't hesitate to hola etc..
> BTW - I don't equate the LOD-Cloud pictorial as being equivalent to the
> Linked Data Web :-)
> Kingsley
>> Best
>> Hugh
>> On 28/04/2009 13:10, "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen at openlinksw.com> wrote:
>> As for the % re. FOAF, I think that can be determined from our actual
>> VoiD graph for LOD cloud [1]. I don't know off the top of my head if
>> FOAF is up to 50%.
>>> The "Linked" part of the name implies that crawling is a valid tactic
>>> to gather the data to me.
>> Not disputing that, just describing what we have in the instance :-)
>> Remember, we've sponged (crawled and RDFized) data since inception of
>> our participation in this space.
>> Links:
>> 1. http://lod.openlinksw.com/void/Dataset
>> Kingsley
> --
> Regards,
> Kingsley Idehen       Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> President & CEO
> OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> _______________________________________________
> foaf-dev mailing list
> foaf-dev at lists.foaf-project.org
> http://lists.foaf-project.org/mailman/listinfo/foaf-dev



Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com

More information about the foaf-dev mailing list