very organized

Linked Data in Production: Moving Beyond Ontologies

Spring 2024 Member Meeting: CNI website • YouTube

David Newbury Assistant Director, Software and UX Getty

Over the past six years, Getty has been engaged in a project to transform and unify its complex digital infrastructure for cultural heritage information. One of the project’s core goals was to provide validation of the impact and value of the use of linked data throughout this process. With museum, archival, media, and vocabularies in production and others underway, this sessions shares some of the practical implications (and pitfalls) of this work—particularly as it relates to interoperability, discovery, staffing, stakeholder engagement, and complexity management. The session will also share examples of how other organizations can streamline their own, similar work going forward.

http://getty.edu/art/collection/ http://getty.edu/research/collections/ http://vocab.getty.edu https://www.getty.edu/projects/remodeling-getty-provenance-index/

The solution is to not create keep creating these fucking problems in the first place.

That this isn't possible with open systems like the Web is well-understood (I think*). But is it feasible to do it with as-yet-untested closed (and moderated) systems? Wikis do something like this, but I'm interested in a service/community that behaves more closely in the concrete details to what is described here.

* I think that this is understood, that is. That it's impossible is not what I'm uncertain about.

Why it's pointless to insist that links should have been bidirectional: it's unenforceable.

Il problema di questa sezione è derubricare i modelli dati come documentazione. Le ontologie di ontopia (parlo di modelli non tanto di dati come i vocabolari controllati) sono machine-readable. Quindi non è solo una questione di documentare la sintassi o il contenuto del dato. È rendere il modello actionable, ossia leggibile e interpretabile dalle macchine stesse. Io potrei benissimo documentare dei dataset con una bella tabellina in Github o con tante tabelline in un bellissimo PDF (documentazione), ma non è la stessa cosa di rendere disponibile un'ontologia per dei dati. Rendere i modelli parte attiva della gestione del dato (come per le ontologie) significa abilitare l'inferenza che avete richiamato sopra in maniera impropria per me, ma anche utilizzarli per explainable AI e tanti altri usi. Questo è un concetto fondamentale che non può essere trattato così in linee guida nazionali. Dovrebbe anzi avere un capitolo suo dedicato, vista l'importanza anche in ottica data quality "compliance" caratteristica di qualità dello standard ISO/IEC 25012.

Tutta la parte di modellazione dati, anche attraverso il catalogo nazionale delle ontologie e vocabolari controllati, sembra ora in mano a ISTAT, titolare, insieme al Dipartimento di Trasformazione Digitale di schema.gov.it. Qui però sembra AGID abbia il ruolo di definire i vari modelli. Secondo me questo crea confusione. bisognerebbe coordinarsi anche con le altre amministrazioni per capire bene chi fa cosa. AGID al momento di OntoPiA gestisce solo un'infrastruttura fisica.

Non è che fate inferenza perché dereferenziate gli URI. Vi suggerisco di leggere bene le linee guida per l'interoperablità semantica attraverso i linked open data che spiega cosìè l'inferenza (e questa sì fa parte di un processo di arricchimento nel mondo linked open data). L'inferenza è una cosa più complessa che si può fare con ragionatori automatici e query sparql. Si possono dedurre nuove informazioni dati dati esistenti e soprattutto dalle ontologie che sono oggetti machine readable!

Non trovo utilità in quanto qui scritto onestamente. Molti più sistemi sono ormai linked open data nativi, quindi oltre al fatto che parlare di linked open data in arricchimento è sbagliato, direi di lasciar perdere questo periodo.

rifraserei in "si basano su diversi standard, tra cui RDF, e spesso usano vocabolari controllati RDF per rappresentare terminologia controllata del dominio applicativo di riferimento"

JSON-LD è una serializzazione RDF nel mondo JSON. Occhio che qui la traduzione in italiano del documento del publications office non è venuta fuori bene (loro dicono data format such as RDF or JSON-LD che sarebbe anche impreciso. RDF è un modello di rappresentazione del dato nel Web. Le serializzazioni RDF sono tipo Ntriple, RDF/Turtle, RDF/XML, JSON-LD). Tra l'altro nell'allegato tecnico sui formati per i dati aperti, testo preso dalla precedente linee guida, JSON-LD è indicato come serializzazione RDF.

Sono open o no?

Qui c'è un problema di fondo proprio concettuale. Il problema è che il paradigma dei Linked Open Data è stato derubricato come arricchimento, che nelle linee guida che si cita qui era solo una fase di un processo generale per la gestione dei dati linked open data. Fare linked open data non vuol solo dire arricchire i dati, ma è possibile gestire un dato fin dalla sua nascita in linked open data nativamente. Questo era lo spirito delle linee guida qui citate. Estrapolando solo una parte avete snaturato un po' tutto. Consiglio di trattare l'argomento com'era trattato nelle precedenti linee guida. Peccato anche che sia sparita la figura della metropolitana che aiutava molto.

Comunque, farei uno sforzo in più, con tutto quello che l'italia ha scritto sui linked open data, per scrivere frasi che non siano proprio paro paro la traduzione in italiano del documento in inglese.

Wordle's spread on social media was enabled in part by its low-tech approach for e.g. sharing scores.

One low-tech approach that could've been used here for data persistence would be to generate and prompt the user to save their latest scorecard in PDF or Word format—only it's not a PDF or Word format, but instead "wordlescore.html" file, albeit one that they are able to save to disk and double click to open all the same. When they need to update their scorecard with today's data, you use window.open to show a page that prompts the user to open their most recent scorecard (using either Ctrl+/Cmd+O, or by navigating to the place where they saved it on disk via bookmark). What's not apparent on sight alone is that their wordlescore.html also contains a JS payload as an inline script. When wordlescore.html is opened, it's able to communicate with the Wordle tab via postMessage to window.opener, request the newest data from the app, and then update wordlescore.html itself as appropriate.

Potential von semantischen Technologien: Auflösung von heterogenen Daten-Silos Technologie: Linked Data

BMBF Wachstumskernprojekt „Linked Enterprise Data Services

Leitidee von Linked Data

Abbildung

The subtext here is, "that's why i created BeachfrontDigital". But this shows how "apps" (and systems) have poisoned how we conceptualize problems and their solutions.

The simplest solution to the problem described is a document, not a never-finished/never-production-ready app. Bespoke apps have lots of cost overhead. Documents, on the other hand—even documents with rich structure—are cheap.

One thing I'd like forward-looking hypertext toolmakers to keep in mind is the ability for the tools to help people answer questions like "What led to legalanthology.ch hosting a copy of this document? Given a URL from one organization, is it possible to look at the graph of internal backlinks (let me focus narrowly on incoming edges originating from the same host)?"

I'm so excited to hear an update on this project!

This is more or less how linked data notifications work. (And Solid, of course, goes beyond that.)

Linked data notifications?

(I like the "sensor" imagery.)

Surely RDF already has something like this...? I tried looking around briefly but couldn't find it.

The personal nature of this information means that users need control of their information. Tim Berners-Lee's Solid (Social Linked Data) project) looks like it could do some of this stuff.

Basic description of Resource Description Framework

I remember the first time I truly understood what Jon meant when he said this. One web page can have an unlimited number of specific addresses pointing into its parts--and through annotation these parts can be connected to an unlimited number of parts of other things. Jon called it: Exploding the web! How far we've come from Vannevar Bush's musings...

pretty great intro to knowledge graphs

¿Qué sistema de organización de conocimiento se los posibilita? ¿Qué están usando para enlazar datos y en qué formato?

Sounds like part of the problem Vitrine technologie-éducation has been tackling with Ceres, a Learning Object Repository with a Semantic core.

Oh? Credentials going Semantic? CBE going TBL?

Might be worth a deeper discussion with @jeffgrann, at some point.

A kind of light-weight linked data approach to connecting web pages?

This pithy statement brings together all sorts of previous annotations. Would be neat to map them.

That’s something we’ve been doing, yes.

Sadly, there may not be much work on opening up data in Higher Education. For instance, there was only one panel at last year’s international Open Data Conference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUtQBC4SqTU

Looking at the interoperability of competency profiles, been wondering if it could be enhanced through use of Linked Open Data.

Well-structured annotations can pave the way towards Linked Open Data.

L’interopérabilité est essentielle à l’avènement du Web des données liées (en éducation comme ailleurs).

Among the most useful summaries I have found for Linked Data, generally, and in relationship to libraries, specifically. After first reading it, got to hear of the acronym LODLAM: “Linked Open Data for Libraries, Archives, and Museums”. Been finding uses for this tag, in no small part because it gets people to think about the connections between diverse knowledge-focused institutions, places where knowledge is constructed. Somewhat surprised academia, universities, colleges, institutes, or educational organisations like schools aren’t explicitly tied to those others. In fact, it’s quite remarkable that education tends to drive much development in #OpenData, as opposed to municipal or federal governments, for instance. But it’s still very interesting to think about Libraries and Museums as moving from a focus on (a Web of) documents to a focus on (a Web of) data.

As long as it has some URI, it can be annotated. Any object in the world can be described through the Semantic Web. Especially with Linked Open Data.

In a nutshell, an ontology answers the question, “What things can we say exist in a domain, and how do we describe those things that relate to each other?”

According to inventor of the World Wide Web, Tim Berners-Lee, there are four key principles of Linked Data (Berners-Lee, 2006): Use URIs to denote things. Use HTTP URIs so that these things can be referred to and looked up (dereferenced) by people and user agents. Provide useful information about the thing when its URI is dereferenced, leveraging standards such as RDF, SPARQL. Include links to other related things (using their URIs) when publishing data on the web.

In section 4.1.3.2 of the xAPI specification, it states “Activity Providers SHOULD use a corresponding existing Verb whenever possible.”

Potential for LODLAM!