Transcript Linked Data Issues  Building  RDFising process (schema, mapping)  Interlinking (automagically, manual)  Deployment (SPARQL end point, dump, RDFa, etc.)  Using     Provenance, trust,

<http://sw-app.org/mic.xhtml#i>
Linked Data Issues
 Building
 RDFising process (schema, mapping)
 Interlinking (automagically, manual)
 Deployment (SPARQL end point, dump, RDFa, etc.)
 Using




1
Provenance, trust, rights, etc.
Access (depending on deployment)
Performance (deref chain, reliability)
Discovery (which is the right LOD dataset for my task ?)
User Contributed Interlinking
 User Contributed Interlinking (UCI) means end-user
manually creates semantic links (Wiki-style)
 Based on the work in riese we developed I R S
(interlinking of resources with semantics, see also
poster session)
 I R S features
 query, add, remove semantic links (owl:sameAs, rdfs:seeAlso,
foaf:topic, etc.)
 subject and object can be set by user (restriction: URIs only)
 resource preview (debug)
 expose data in XHTML+RDFa + SPARQL end point
 lookup in http://sindice.com for unknown resources
 simple provenance tracking through named graphs
2
Discovery
 how to determine what a LOD dataset is about (or:
find the right LOD dataset for a certain task)
 FYN, for sure, but how about a rough categorisation
 certain things can be done with the semantic sitemap
extension (type of access, etc.)
 what about the rest? proposal: metaLOD
 metaLOD should cover:




3
a simple vocabulary
way of accessing information (no centralised registry)
good practice rules for LOD dataset operators
currently we are gathering ideas – consider contributing 