• Friendfeed
• Twitter

Enjoy!

This is fundamentally an animation demonstrating Semantic Web exploitation in the classic: picture speaks a thousand words manner. It also illustrates (yet again) the important Data Space(s) aspect of creating Semantic Web presence.

Finally, the Web 2.0 usage pattern tries to espouse what's demonstrated in this animation via data-context-challenged interactions (due to its "Walled Garden" and "Data Silo" approach to Data Access etc..). The Semantic Web (as per numerous posts on the subject) on the other hand achieves this via data-context-aware interactions (as will be exemplified via meshups).

How Does It work?

1. Instantiate a Virtuoso EC2 AMI (paid variety, which is aggressively priced at $49.99 for setup and $19.99 per month thereafter)
2. Mount the shared DBpedia 3.4 public snapshot
3. Start Virtuoso Server
4. Start exploiting the DBpedia Linked Data Space.

What Interfaces are exposed?

1. SPARQL Endpoint
2. Linked Data Viewer Pages (as you see in the public DBpedia instance)
3. Faceted Search & Find UI and Web Services (REST or SOAP)
4. All the inference rules for UMBEL, SUMO, YAGO, OpenCYC, and DBpedia-OWL data dictionaries
5. Type Correlations Between DBpedia and Freebase

Enjoy!

How Does It work?

1. Instantiate a Virtuoso EC2 AMI (paid variety, which is aggressively priced at $49.99 for setup and $19.99 per month thereafter)
2. Mount the shared DBpedia 3.4 public snapshot
3. Start Virtuoso Server
4. Start exploiting the DBpedia Linked Data Space.

What Interfaces are exposed?

1. SPARQL Endpoint
2. Linked Data Viewer Pages (as you see in the public DBpedia instance)
3. Faceted Search & Find UI and Web Services (REST or SOAP)
4. All the inference rules for UMBEL, SUMO, YAGO, OpenCYC, and DBpedia-OWL data dictionaries
5. Type Correlations Between DBpedia and Freebase

Enjoy!

Dr. Dre is one of the artists in the Linked Data Space we host for the BBC. He is also referenced in music oriented data spaces such as DBpedia, MusicBrainz and Last.FM (to name a few).

Challenge:

How do I obtain a holistic view of the entity "Dr. Dre" across the BBC, MusicBrainz, and Last.FM data spaces? We know the BBC published Linked Data, but what about Last.FM and MusicBrainz? Both of these data spaces only expose XML or JSON data via REST APIs?

Solution:

Steps:

1. Go to Last.FM and search using pattern: Dr. Dre (you will end up with this URL: http://www.last.fm/music/Dr.+Dre)
2. Go to the Virtuoso powered BBC Linked Data Space home page and enter: http://bbc.openlinksw.com/about/html/http://www.last.fm/music/Dr.+Dre
3. Go to the BBC Linked Data Space home page and type full text pattern (using default tab): Dr. Dre, then view Dr. Dre's metadata via the Statistics Link.

What Happened?

The following took place:

1. Virtuoso Sponger sent an HTTP GET to Last.FM
2. Distilled the "Artist" entity "Dr. Dre" from the page, and made a Linked Data graph
3. Inverse Functional Property and sameAs reasoning handled the Meshup (augmented graph from a conjunctive query processing pipeline)
4. Links for "Dr. Dre" across BBC (sameAs), Last.FM (seeAlso), via DBpedia URI.

The new enhanced URI for Dr. Dre now provides a rich holistic view of the aforementioned "Artist" entity. This URI is usable anywhere on the Web for Linked Data Conduction :-)

Related (as in NearBy)

• Augmenting Last.fm Data with BBC data on the Talis Platform

Daniel Lewis has just published a nice blog post titled: The Data Space Philosophy, that puts the underlying Data Space concept in perspective.

The Linked Data Web is a Giant Global Graph of Data Spaces (meshes of data and identity exposed by graphs connecting data and identity)

Data Portability ultimately depends on platforms that provide unobtrusive generation of Linked Data (for data referencing) alongside support for a plethora of industry standard data formats -- which is what OpenLink Data Spaces has been about for a very long time :-)

Related

- Identity - Philosophy

- Identity - Mathematics

- Identity - Object Oriented Programming

Anyway, we now have OpenID support in OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS) which coincides nicely with the growing support of OpenID across the web.

The beauty of OpenID support in ODS is that I now have a URL that meshes with my identity (at least in line with what I have chosed to share with the public via the Web). For instance, http://www.openlinksw.com/dataspace/kidehen@openlinksw.com is my OpenID as well as my personal URI (you look closer at this link and you have a map of my Data Space).

To really understand what I am getting at here you should open up My OpenID URL using one of the following:

1. Semantic Radar
2. PiggyBank
3. SIOC Enabled Wiki

To be continued....

Live Examples

1. Abraham Lincoln - Freebase (note: link from Freebase to DBpedia via Wikipedia)
2. Amazon - CrunchBase (note: links from CruncBase to DBpedia)
3. Cold Play - BBC Music Beta (note: links to Musicbrainz)
4. Linked Data Planet Presentation - Also a Slidy, Bibo Ontology, and RDFa usage example
5. Music - OpenCyc Concept which exposes a Hyperdata link to its equivalent UMBEL Subject Concept and back

Virtuoso's RDFization Middleware & Linked Data Deployment Architecture Diagram

Note: You can substitute my examples using any Web resource URL. The underlying RDFization and Linked Data deployment functionality of the Virtuoso demo instance takes care of everything else. Also note that the HTML based resource description page capability is now deployed as part of the Virtuoso Sponger component of every Virtuoso installation starting with from version 5.0.8.

OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS) now officially supports:

• Attention Profiling Markup Language (APML).
• Meaning of a Tag (MOAT) in conjunction with Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) and Social-Semantic Cloud of Tags (SCOT).
• OAuth - an Open Authentication Protocol

Which means that OpenLink Data Spaces support all of the main standards being discussed in the DataPortability Interest Group!

APML Example:

All users of ODS automatically get a dynamically created APML file, for example: APML profile for Kingsley Idehen

The URI for an APML profile is: http://myopenlink.net/dataspace/<ods-username>/apml.xml

Meaning of a Tag Example:

All users of ODS automatically have tag cloud information embedded inside their SIOC file, for example: SIOC for Kingsley Idehen on the Myopenlink.net installation of ODS.

But even better, MOAT has been implemented in the ODS Tagging System. This has been demonstrated in a recent test blog post by my colleague Mitko Iliev, the blog post comes up on the tag search: http://myopenlink.net/dataspace/imitko/weblog/Mitko%27s%20Weblog/tag/paris

Which can be put through the OpenLink Data Browser:

• OpenLink Data Browser with Mitko Iliev’s Paris Blog Tag

OAuth Example:

OAuth Tokens and Secrets can be created for any ODS application. To do this:

1. you can log in to MyOpenlink.net beta service, the Live Demo ODS installation, an EC2 instance, or your local installation
2. then go to ‘Settings’
3. and then you will see ‘OAuth Keys’
4. you will then be able to choose the applications that you have instantiated and generate the token and secret for that app.

Related Document (Human) Links

• OpenLink Data Spaces Official Page
• OpenLink Software Page
• OpenLink Data Spaces Wikipedia Page
• Attention Profiling Markup Language Project Website
• Meaning of a Tag Project Website
• Simple Knowledge Organisation Systems Project Website
• Social-Semantic Cloud of Tags Project Website
• OAuth Protocol Website
• DataPortability.org Website
• Semantically Interlinked Online Communities Project Website
  

Remember (as per my most recent post about ODS), ODS is about unobtrusive fusion of Web 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0+ usage and interaction patterns. Thanks to a lot of recent standardization in the Semantic Web realm (e.g SPARQL), we are now employ the MOAT, SKOS, and SCOT ontologies as vehicles for Structured Tagging.

Structured Tagging?

This is how we take a key Web 2.0 feature (think 2D in a sense), bend it over, to create a Linked Data Web (Web 3.0) experience unobtrusively (see earlier posts re. Dimensions of Web). Thus, nobody has to change how they tag or where they tag, just expose ODS to the URLs of your Web 2.0 tagged content and it will produce URIs (Structured Data Object Identifiers) and a lnked data graph for your Tags Data Space (nee. Tag Cloud). ODS will construct a graph which exposes tag subject association, tag concept alignment / intended meaning, and tag frequencies, that ultimately deliver "relative disambiguation" of intended Tag Meaning (i.e. you can easily discern the taggers meaning via the Tags actual Data Space which is associated with the tagger). In a nutshell, the dynamics of relevance matching, ranking, and the like, change immensely without futile timeless debates about matters such as:

What's the Linked Data value proposition?

What's the Linked Data business model?

XML vs RDF

XQuery vs SPARQL

What's the Semantic Web Killer application?

We can just get on with demonstrating Linked Data value using what exists on the Web today. This is the approach we are deliberately taking with ODS.

Related Items

Stefano Mazzocch's response to Clay Shirky's 2005 talk titled: Ontology is Overrated: Links, Tags and Post-hoc Metadata

Tom Gruber's post titled: Ontology of Folksonomy: A Mash-up of Apples and Oranges

Tip: This post is best viewed via an RDF aware User Agent (e.g. a Browser or Data Viewer). I say this because the permalink of this post is a URI in a Linked Data Space (My Blog) comprised of more data than meets the eye (i.e. what you see when you read this post via a Document Web Browser) :-)

Note: the enhanced hyperlink (typed data link) lookup presents options to perform an Explore (all data about subject across Domains in the data space i.e. data links to and from Subject), Dereference (specific data in the Subject's Domain i.e. data links originating from subject).

1. Diana Ross
2. Paul McCartney
3. The Beatles
4. Madonna

I built these Linked Data Pages by simply doing the following:

1. Open up our OAT based iSPARQL (Interactive SPARQL Query By Example) Tool
2. Paste a URI of Interest into the Data Source URI input field
3. Execute the Query (hitting the ">" button)
4. Saving the Query to WebDAV as a Linked Data Page (or what I initial called Dynamic Data Web pages in my Hello Data Web series of posts).
5. Share your Data, Information, Knowledge with others via URIs (as shown in the section above).

Now that broader understanding of the Semantic Data Web is emerging, I would like to revisit the issue of "Data Spaces".

A Data Space is a place where Data Resides. It isn't inherently bound to a specific Data Model (Concept Oriented, Relational, Hierarchical etc..). Neither is it implicitly an access point to Data, Information, or Knowledge (the perception is purely determined through the experiences of the user agents interacting with the Data Space.

A Web Data Space is a Web accessible Data Space.

Real world example:

Today we increasing perform one of more of the following tasks as part of our professional and personal interactions on the Web:

1. Blog via many service providers or personally managed weblog platforms
2. Create Event Calendars via Upcoming.com and Eventful
3. Maintain and participate in Social Networks (e.g. Facebook, Orkut, MySpace)
4. Create and Participate in Discussions (note: when you comment on blogs or wikis for instance, you are participating in, or creating, a conversation)
5. Track news by subscribing to RSS 1.0, RSS 2.0, or Atom Feeds
6. Share Bookmarks & Tags via Del.icio.us and other Services
7. Share Photos via Flickr
8. Buy, Review, or Search for books via Amazon
9. Participates in auctions via eBay
10. Search for data via Google (of course!)

John Breslin has nice a animation depicting the creation of Web Data Spaces that drives home the point.

Unfortunately, what isn't as obvious to many netizens, is the fact that each of the activities above results in the creation of data that is put into some context by you the user. Even worse, you eventually realize that the service providers aren't particularly willing, or capable of, giving you unfettered access to your own data. Of course, this isn't always by design as the infrastructure behind the service can make this a nightmare from security and/or load balancing perspectives. Irrespective of cause, we end up creating our own "Data Spaces" all over the Web without a coherent mechanism for accessing and meshing these "Data Spaces".

Data Spaces on the Web that provide granular access to RDF Data.

Short History

In anticipation of this the "Web Data Silo" challenge (an issue that we tackled within internal enterprise networks for years) we commenced the development (circa. 2001) of a distributed collaborative application suite called OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS). The project was never released to the public since the problems associated with the deliberate or inadvertent creation of Web Data silos hadn't really materialized (silos only emerged in concreted form after the emergence of the Blogosphere and Web 2.0). In addition, there wasn't a clear standard Query Language for the RDF based Web Data Model (i.e. the SPARQL Query Language didn't exist).

Today, ODS is delivered as a packaged solution (in Open Source and Commercial flavors) that alleviates the pain associated with Data Space Silos that exist on the Web and/or behind corporate firewalls. In either scenario, ODS simply allows you to create Open and Secure Data Spaces (via it's suite of applications) that expose data via SQL, RDF, XML oriented data access and data management technologies. Of course it also enables you to integrates transparently with existing 3rd party data space generators (Blogs, Wikis, Shared Bookmrks, Discussion etc. services) by supporting industry standards that cover:

1. Content Publishing - Atom, Moveable Type, MetaWeblog, Blogger protocols
2. Content Syndication Formats - RSS 1.0, RSS 2.0, Atom, OPML etc.
3. Data Management - SQL, RDF, XML, Free Text
4. Data Access - SQL, SPARQL, GData, Web Services (SOAP or REST styles), WebDAV/HTTP
5. Semantic Data Web Middleware - GRDDL, XSLT, SPARQL, XPath/XQuery, HTTP (Content Negotiation) for producing RDF from non RDF Data ((X)HTML, Microformats, XML, Web Services Response Data etc).

Thus, by installing ODS on your Desktop, Workgroup, Enterprise, or public Web Server, you end up with a very powerful solution for creating Open Data access oriented presence on the "Semantic Data Web" without incurring any of the typically assumed "RDF Tax".

Naturally, ODS is built atop Virtuoso and of course it exploits Virtuoso's feature-set to the max. It's also beginning to exploit functionality offered by the OpenLink Ajax Toolkit (OAT).

1. Acquire your own personal or service specific data space in the Cloud. Think DBase, Paradox, FoxPRO, Access of yore, but with the power of Oracle, Informix, Microsoft SQL Server etc.. using a Conceptual, as opposed to solely Logical, model based DBMS (i.e., a Hybrid DBMS Engine for: SQL, RDF, XML, and Full Text)
2. Ability to share and control access to your resources using innovations like FOAF+SSL, OpenID, and OAuth, all from one place
3. Construction of personal or organization based FOAF profiles in a matter of minutes; by simply creating a basic DBMS (or ODS application layer) account; and then using this profile to create strong links (references) to all your Data silos (esp. those from the Web 2.0 realm)
4. Load data sets from the LOD cloud or Sponge existing Web resources (i.e., on the fly data transformation to RDF model based Linked Data) and then use the combination to build powerful lookup services that enrich the value of URLs (think: Web addressable reports holding query results) that you publish
5. Bind all of the above to a domain that you own (e.g. a .Name domain) so that you have an attribution-friendly "authority" component for resource URLs and Entity URIs published from your Personal Linked Data Space on the Web (or private HTTP network).

In a nutshell, the AWS Cloud infrastructure simplifies the process of generating Federated presence on the Internet and/or World Wide Web. Remember, centralized networking models always end up creating data silos, in some context, ultimately! :-)

The journey towards this watershed moment started with the Semantic Web Project, gained focus and pragmatism via the Linked Data meme, attained substance & credibility via efforts such as DBpedia and the resulting cloud of Open Linked Data Spaces, and finally arrived at the most important destination of all: broad comprehension and coherence, via RDFa.

Over the years, I've chronicled the journey above via entries in this particular data space (my blog) and most recently, via my rapid-fire comments and debates on Twitter (basically hastag #linkeddata account: kidehen).

On a parallel front re. my chronicles, I've periodically had conversations with Jon Udell, who has always provided a coherent sounding board and reconciliation framework for my world views and open data access vision; naturally, this has a lot to do with his holistic grasp of the big picture issues, associated technical details, and special communication prowess :-)

Against this backdrop, I refer you to my most recent podcast conversation with Jon, which is about how the tandem of HTML+RDFa and the GoodRelations vocabulary deliver the critical missing links re. broad comprehension of the Semantic Web vision en route to mass exploitation.

Related

• Mark Birbeck Introduces RDFa
• RDFa Handbook
• GoodRelations Usage Examples & Templates
• Be the master of your own search index
• Jon Udell Interviews Martin Hepp about GoodRelations, RDFa, and Esoteric Web Search
  

1. Identify or Name things using HTTP URIs
2. Describe things using the RDF metadata model
3. Increase link data mesh density on the Web by linking (referring) to things in other data spaces using their HTTP URIs.

If you perform the steps above, on any HTTP network (e.g. World Wide Web), you implicitly bind the Names/Identifiers of things to negotiable representations of their metadata (description) bearing documents.

Also note, you can create and deploy the resulting RDF metadata using any of the following approaches:

1. RDFa within (X)HTML documents
2. N3, Turtle, TriX, RDF/XML etc. based documents
3. Programmatically generated variants of 1&2.

Related

• What is the Linked Data meme about?
• Simple Explanation of RDF and Linked Data Dynamics

ODBC identifies data sources using Data Source Names (DSNs).

WODBC (Web Open Database Connectivity) delivers open data access to Web Databases / Data Spaces. The Data Source Naming scheme: URI or IRI, is HTTP based thereby enabling data access by reference via the Web.

ODBC DSNs bind ODBC client applications to Tables, Views, Stored Procedures.

WODBC DSNs bind you to a Data Space (e.g. my FOAF based Profile Page where you can use the "Explore Data Tab" to look around if you are a human visitor) or a specific Entity within a Data Space (i.e Person Entity Me).

ODBC Drivers are built using APIs (DBMS Call Level Interfaces) provided by DBMS vendors. Thus, a DBMS vendor can chose not to release an API, or do so selectivity, for competitive advantage or market disruption purposes (it's happened!).

WODBC Drivers are also built using APIs (Web Services associated with a Web Data Space). These drivers are also referred to as RDF Middleware or RDFizers. The "Web" component of WODBC ensures openness, you publish Data with URIs from your Linked Data Server and that's it; your data space or specific data entities are live and accessible (by reference) over the Web!

So we have come full circle (or cycle), the Web is becoming more of a structured database everyday! What's new is old, and what's old is new!

Data Access is everything, without "Data" there is no information or knowledge. Without "Data" there's not notion of vitality, purpose, or value.

URIs make or break everything in the Linked Data Web just as ODBC DSNs do within the enterprise.

I've deliberately left JDBC, ADO.NET, and OLE-DB out of this piece due to their respective programming languages and frameworks specificity. None of these mechanisms match the platform availability breadth of ODBC.

The Web as a true M-V-C pattern is now crystalizing. The "M" (Model) component of M-V-C is finally rising to the realm of broad attention courtesy of the "Linked Data" meme and "Semantic Web" vision.

By the way, M-V-C lines up nicely with Web 1.0 (Web Forms / Pages), Web 2.0 (Web Services based APIs), and Web 3.0 (Data Web, Web of Data, or Linked Data Web) :-)

As I can't quite remix Videos on the spur of the moment (yet), I would encourage you to watch the video and then click on the link to my FOAF Profile, then follow the "Linked Data" tab to see how Linked Data oriented platforms (in my case OpenLink Data Spaces) that exist today actually deliver what's explained in the video.

"What You Know" (Data & Friend Networks) ultimately trumps "Who You Know" (Friend only Networks). The exploitation power of this reality is enhanced exponentially via the Linked Data Web once the implications of beaming SPARQL queries down specific URIs (entry points to Linked Data graphs) become clearer :-)

Trent Adams, Steve Greenberg, and I, also had a podcast chat about Web Data Portability and Accessibility (Linked Data). I also remixed Jon Breslin's "Data Portability & Me" presentation to produce: "Data Accessibility & Me".

The podcasts interviews and presentations provide contributions to the broadening discourse about Open Data Access / Connectivity on the Web.

There are quite a few reasons to use OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS). Here are 10 of the reasons why I use ODS:

1. Its native support of DataPortability Recommendations such as RSS, Atom, APML, Yadis, OPML, Microformats, FOAF, SIOC, OpenID and OAuth.
2. Its native support of Semantic Web Technologies such as: RDF and SPARQL/SPARUL for querying.
3. Everything in ODS is an Object with its own URI, this is due to the underlying Object-Relational Architecture provided by Virtuoso.
4. It has all the social media components that you could need, including: blogs, wikis, social networks, feed readers, CRM and a calendar.
5. It is expandable by installing pre-configured components (called VADs), or by re-configuring a LAMP application to use Virtuoso. Some examples of current VADs include: MediaWiki, Wordpress and Drupal.
6. It works with external webservices such as: Facebook, del.icio.us and Flickr.
7. Everything within OpenLink Data Spaces is Linked Data, which provides more meaningful information than just plain structural information. This meaningful information could be used for complex inferencing systems, as ODS can be seen as a Knowledge Base.
8. ODS builds bridges between the existing static-document based web (aka ‘Web 1.0‘), the more dynamic,  services-oriented, social and/or user-orientated webs (aka ‘Web 2.0‘) and the web which we are just going into, which is more data-orientated (aka ‘Web 3.0’ or ‘Linked Data Web’).
9. It is fully supportive of Cloud Computing, and can be installed on Amazon EC2.
10. Its released free under the GNU General Public License (GPL). [note]However, it is technically dual licensed as it lays on top of the Virtuoso Universal Server which has both Commercial and GPL licensing[/note]

The features above collectively provide users with a Linked Data Junction Box that may reside with corporate intranets or "out in the clouds" (Internet). You can consume, share, and publish data in a myriad of formats using a plethora of protocols, without any programming. ODS is simply about exposing the data from your Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 application interactions in structured from, with Linking, Sharing, and ultimately Meshing (not Mashing) in mind.

Note: Although ODS is equipped with a broad array of Web 2.0 style Applications, you do not need to use native ODS apps in order to exploit it's power. It binds to anything that supports the relevant protocols and data formats.

If you want to explore who I know, what I read, and what I've tagged (amongst other things), all you have to do is:

1. Beam a SPARQL query down my data space URIs which expose FOAF or SIOC based interconnected Linked Data graphs.
2. Walkthrough using an RDF Browser until you reach a beachhead and then beam your SPARQL from there (remember you only need the URI of the RDF Data Source, and while in my Data Space every data item has a proper URI).

Some Tools that help you comprehend what I am saying:

Browsers

Zitgist Data Viewer (SIOC and FOAF data spaces)

OpenLink RDF Browser (SIOC and FOAF data spaces)

DISCO (SIOC and FOAF data spaces)

Tabulator

Query Tools

SPARQL Demo

iSPARQL QBE

Information overload and Data Portability are two of the most pressing and imminent challenges affecting every individual connected to the global village exposed by the Internet and World Wide Web. I wrote an earlier post titled: Why We Need Linked Data that shed light on frequently overlooked realities about the Document Web.

The real Killer application of the Semantic Web (imho) is Linked Data (or Hyperdata), just as the killer application of the Document Web was Linked Documents (Hyperlinks). Linked Data enables human users (indirectly) and software agents (directly in response to human instruction) to traverse Web Data Spaces (Linked Data enclaves within the Giant Global Graph).

Semantic Web applications (conduits between humans and agents) that take advantage of Linked Data include:

DBpedia - General Knowledge sourced from Wikipedia and a host of other Linked Data Spaces.

Various Linked Data Browsers: Zitgist Data Viewer, OpenLink RDF Browser, DISCO Browser, and TimBL's Tabulator.

zLknks - Linked Data Lookup technology for Web Content Publishing systems (note: more to come on this in a future post).

OpenLink Data Spaces - a solution for Data Portability via a Linked Data Junction Box for Web 1.0 ((X)HTML Document Webs), 2.0 (XML Web Services based Content Publishing, Content Syndication, and Aggregation), and 3.0 (Linked Data) Data Spaces. Thus, via my URI (when viewed through a Linked Data Browser/Viewer) you can traverse my Data Space (i.e my Linked Data Graph) generated by the following activities:

Blog Posts publishing

My RSS & Atom Content Subscriptions (what used to be called a "Blogroll")

My Bookmarks (from my Desktop and Del.icio.us)

and other things I choose to share with the public via the Web

Virtuoso - a Universal Server Platform that includes RDF Data Management, RDFization Middleware, SQL-RDF Mapping, RDF Linked Data Deployment, alongside a hybrid/multi-model, virtual/federated data service in a single product offering.

Here goes:

1. Alan Wilensky recalls his early encounters with OpenLink Data Spaces (circa. 2004)
2. Daniel Lewis shares his "state of the Semantic Data Web" findings
3. Daniel Lewis experiences OpenLink Data Space first hand en route to creating Data Spaces in the Clouds (the Fourth Platform).

In addition, in one week, courtesy of the Web, UK Semnantic Web Gatherings in Bristol and Oxford, I discover, interview, and employ Daniel :-) Imagine how long this would have taken to pull off via the Document Web, assuming I would even discover Daniel.

As with all things these days, the Web and Internet change everything, which includes talent discovery and recruitment.

A Global Social graph that is a mesh of Linked Data enables the process of recruitment, marketing, and other elements of busines management to be condensed down to a sending powerful beams across the aforementioned Graph :-) The only variable pieces are the traversal paths exposed to your beam via the beam's entry point URI. In my case, I have a single URI that exposes a Graph of critical paths for the Blogosphere (i.e data spaces of RSS Atom Feeds). Thus, I can discover if your profile matches the requirements associated with an opening at OpenLink Software (most of the time) before you do :-)

BTW - I just noticed that John Breslin described ODS as social-graph++ in his recent post, titled: Tales from the SIOC-o-sphere, part 6. In a funny way, this reminds of a post from the early blogosphere days about platforms and Weblog APIs (circa. 2003) about ODS (then exposed via the Blog Platform realm of Virtuoso).

Jon Udell recently penned a post titled: The Fourth Platform. The post arrives at a spookily coincidental time (this happens quite often between Jon and I as demonstrated last year during our podcast; the "Fourth" in his Innovators Podcast series).

The platform that Jon describes is "Cloud Based" and comprised of Storage and Computation. I would like to add Data Access and Management (native and virtual) under the fourth platform banner with the end product called: "Cloud based Data Spaces".

As I write, we are releasing a Virtuoso AMI (Amazon Image) labeled: virtuoso-dataspace-server. This edition of Virtuoso includes the OpenLink Data Spaces Layer and all of the OAT applications we've been developing for a while.

What Benefits Does this offer?

1. Personal Data Spaces in the Cloud - a place where you can control and consolidate data across your Blogs, Wikis, RSS/Atom Feed Subscriptions, Shared Bookmarks, Shared Calendars, Discussion Threads, Photo Galleries etc
2. All the data in your Data Space is SPARQL or GData accessible.
3. All of the data in your Personal Data Space is Linked Data from the get go. Each Item of data is URI addressable
4. SIOC support - your Blogs, Wikis, Bookmarks etc.. are based on the SIOC ontology for Semantically Interlinking Online Communities (think: Open social-graph++)
5. FOAF support - your FOAF Profile page provides a URI that is an in-road to all Data in your Data Space.
6. OpenID support - your Personal Data Space ID is usable wherever OpenID is supported. OpenID and FOAF are integrated as per latest FOAF specs
7. Two Integration with Facebook - You can access your Data Space from Facebook or access Facebook from your Data Space
8. Unified Storage - The WebDAV based filesystem provides Cloud Storage that's integrated with Amazon S3; It also exposes all of your Data Space data via a traditional filesystem UI (think virtual Spotlight); You can also mount this drive to your local filesystem via your native operating system's WebDAV support
9. SyncML - you can sync calendar and contact details with your Data Space in the cloud from your Mobile phone.
10. A practical Semantic Data Web solution - based on Web Infrastructure and doesn't require you to do anything beyond exposing URIs for data in your Data Spaces.

EC2-AMI Details:

AMI ID: ami-e2ca2f8b

Manifest file: virtuoso-images/virtuoso-dataspace-server.manifest.xml

Installation Guide:

1. Get an Amazon Web Services (AWS) account
2. Signup for S3 and EC2 services
3. Install the EC2 plugin for Firefox
4. Start the EC2 plugin
5. Locate the row containing ami-7c31d515  Manifest virtuoso-test/virtuoso-cloud-beta-9-i386.manifest.xml (sort using the AMI ID or Manifest Columns or search on pattern: virtuoso, due to name flux)
6. Start the Virtuoso Data Space Server AMI
7. Wait 4-5 minutes (*take a few minutes to create the pre-configured Linux Image*)
8. Connect to http://http://your-ec2-instance-cname:8890/ Log in with user/password dba/dba
9. Go to the Admin UI (Virtuoso Conductor) and change the PWDs for the 'dba' and 'dav' accounts (*Important!*)
10. Give the "SPARQL" user "SPARQL_UPDATE" privileges (required if you want to exploit the in-built Sponger Middleware)
11. Click on the ODS (OpenLink Data Spaces) link to start an Personal Editon of OpenLink Data Spaces (or go to: http://your-ec2-instance-cname/dataspace/ods/index.html)
12. Log-in using the username and password credentials for the 'dav' account (or register a new user note: OpenID is an option here also) Create an Data Space Application Instance by clicking on a Data Space App. Tab
13. Import data from your existing Web 2.0 style applications into OpenLink Data Spaces e.g. subscribe to a few RSS/Atom feeds via the "Feeds Manager" application or import some Bookmarks using the "Bookmarks" application
14. Then look at the imported data in Linked Data form via your ODS generated URIs based on the patterns: http://your-ec2-instance-cname/dataspace/person/your-ods-id#this (URI for You the Person), http://your-ec2-instance-cname/dataspace/person/your-ods-id (FOAF File URI), http://your-ec2-instance-cname/dataspace/your-ods-id (SIOC File URI)
    

(OAT) from your Data Space instance

1. http://:8890/oatdemo - Entire OAT Demo Collection
2. http://:8890/rdfbrowser - RDF Browser
3. http://:8890/isparql - SPARQL Query Builder (iSPARQL)
4. http://:8890/qbe - SQL Query Builder (iSQL)
5. http://:8890/formdesigner - Forms Builder (for building Meshups based on RDF, SQL, or Web Servives Data Souces)
6. http://:8890/dbdesigner - SQL DB Schema Designer (note a Visual SQL-RDF Mapper is also on it's way
7. http://:8890/DAV/JS/ - To view the OAT Tree (there are some experimental demos that are missing from the main demo app etc..)

There's more to come!

SPARQL (query language for the Semantic Web) basically enables me to query a collection of typed links (predicates/properties/attributes) in my Data Space (ODS based of course) without breaking my existing local bookmarks database or the one I maintain at del.icio.us.

I am also demonstrating how Web 2.0 concepts such as Tagging mesh nicely with the more formal concepts of Topics in the Semantic Web realm. The key to all of this is the ability to generate RDF Data Model Instance Data based on Shared Ontologies such as SIOC (from DERI's SIOC Project) and SKOS (again showing that Ontologies and Folksonomies are complimentary).

This demo also shows that Ajax also works well in the Semantic Web realm (or web dimension of interaction 3.0) especially when you have a toolkit with Data Aware controls (for SQL, RDF, and XML) such as OAT (OpenLink Ajax Toolkit). For instance, we've successfully used this to build a Visual Query Building Tool for SPARQL (alpha) that really takes a lot of the pain out of constructing SPARQL Queries (there is much more to come on this front re. handling of DISTINCT, FILTER, ORDER BY etc..).

For now, take a look at the SPARQL Query dump generated by this SIOC & SKOS SPARQL QBE Canvas Screenshot.

You can cut and paste the queries that follow into the Query Builder or use the screenshot to build your variation of this query sample. Alternatively, you can simply click on *This* SPARQL Protocol URL to see the query results in a basic HTML Table. And one last thing, you can grab the SPARQL Query File saved into my ODS-Briefcase (the WebDAV repository aspect of my Data Space).

Note the following SPARQL Protocol Endpoints:

1. MyOpenLink Data Space
2. Experimental Data Space SPARQL Query Builder (you need to register at http://myopenlink.net:8890/ods to use this version)
3. Live Demo Sever
4. Demo Server SPARQL Query Builder (use: demo for both username and pwd when prompted)

My beautified Version of the SPARQL Generated by QBE (you can cut and paste into "Advanced Query" section of QBE) is presented below:

PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX sioc: <http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#>
PREFIX dct: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/>
PREFIX skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>


SELECT distinct 
       ?forum_name, 
       ?owner, 
       ?post, 
       ?title, 
       ?link, 
       ?url, 
       ?tag
FROM <http://myopenlink.net/dataspace>
WHERE {
       ?forum a sioc:Forum;
                   sioc:type "bookmark";
                   sioc:id ?forum_name;
                   sioc:has_member ?owner.
       ?owner sioc:id "kidehen".
       ?forum sioc:container_of ?post .
       ?post  dct:title ?title .
       optional { ?post sioc:link ?link  }
       optional { ?post sioc:links_to ?url }
       optional { ?post sioc:topic ?topic.
                        ?topic a skos:Concept;
                                  skos:prefLabel ?tag}.
     } 

Unmodified dump from the QBE (this will be beautified automatically in due course by the QBE):

PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX sioc: <http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#>
PREFIX dct: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/>
PREFIX skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>


SELECT ?var8 ?var9 ?var13 ?var14 ?var24 ?var27 ?var29 ?var54 ?var56
WHERE
{
graph ?graph {
 ?var8 rdf:type sioc:Forum .
 ?var8 sioc:container_of ?var9 .
 ?var8 sioc:type "bookmark" .
 ?var8 sioc:id ?var54 .
 ?var8 sioc:has_member ?var56 .
 ?var9 rdf:type sioc:Post .
 OPTIONAL {?var9 dc:title ?var13} .
 OPTIONAL {?var9 sioc:links_to ?var14} .
 OPTIONAL {?var9 sioc:link ?var29} .
 ?var9 sioc:has_creator ?var37 .
 OPTIONAL {?var9 sioc:topic ?var24} .
 ?var24 rdf:type skos:Concept .
 OPTIONAL {?var24 skos:prefLabel ?var27} .
 ?var56 rdf:type sioc:User .
 ?var56 sioc:id "kidehen" .
 }
} 

Current missing items re. Visual QBE for SPARQL are:

1. Ability to Save properly to WebDAV so that I can then expose various saved SPARQL Queries (.rq file) from my Data Space via URIs
2. Handling of DISTINCT, FILTERS (note: OPTIONAL is handled via dotted predicate-links)
3. General tidying up re. click event handling etc.

1. Export some bookmarks from your local browser to the usual HTML bookmarks dump file
2. Create an ODS-Bookmarks Instance using your new ODS account
3. Use the ODS-Bookmark Instance to import your local bookmarks from the HTML dump file
4. Repeat the same import sequence using the ODS-Bookmark Instance, but this time pick the del.icio.us option
5. Build your query (change 'kidehen' to your ODS-user-name)
6. That's it you now have Semantic Web presence in the form of a Data Space for your local and del.icio.us hosted bookmarks with tags integrated

Quick Query Builder Tip: You will need to import the following (using the Import Button in the Ontologies & Schemas side-bar);

1. http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# (RDF)
2. http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns# (SIOC)
3. http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ (Dublin Core)
4. http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core# (SKOS)

Browser Support: The SPARQL QBE is SVG based and currently works fine with the following browsers; Firefox 1.5/2.0, Camino (Cocoa variant of Firefox for Mac OS X), Webkit (Safari pre-release / advanced sibling), Opera 9.x. We are evaluating the use of the Adobe SVG plugin re. IE 6/7 support.

Of course this should be a screencast, but I am the middle of a plethora of things right now :-)

What is Blogosphere 2.0 anyway?

Blog clusters that incorporate the "Open Data Access" dimension to their usage pattern via content exported as RDF Data Sets or Virtual RDF Data Sets (as demonstrated by the OpenLink Data Spaces SIOC Reference). In either scenario, the RDF rendition of blog content is accessible for to ad-hoc querying via SPARQL (btw - checkout this cool SPARQL FAQ).

The really fascinating thing about the "Blgosophere 2.0" is that the transition from "Blogosphere 1.0" is going to be transparent! The "Open Data Access" will actually do the talking etc..

For additional clarity re. my comments above, you can also look at the SPARQL & SIOC Usecase samples document for our OpenLink Data Spaces platform. Bottom line, the Semantic Web and SPARQL aren't BORING. In fact, quite the contrary, since they are essential ingredients of a more powerful Web than the one we work with today!

Enjoy the rest of John's post:

Creating connections between discussion clouds with SIOC:

(Extract from our forthcoming BlogTalk paper about browsers for SIOC.)

SIOC provides a unified vocabulary for content and interaction description: a semantic layer that can co-exist with existing discussion platforms. Using SIOC, various linkages are created between the aforementioned concepts, which allow new methods of accessing this linked data, including:

• Virtual Forums. These may be a gathering of posts or threads which are distributed across discussion platforms, for example, where a user has found posts from a number of blogs that can be associated with a particular category of interest, or an agent identifies relevant posts across a certain timeframe.
• Distributed Conversations. Trackbacks are commonly used to link blog posts to previous posts on a related topic. By creating links in both directions, not only across blogs but across all types of internet discussions, conversations can be followed regardless of what point or URI fragment a browser enters at.
• Unified Communities. Apart from creating a web page with a number of relevant links to the blogs or forums or people involved in a particular community, there is no standard way to define what makes up an online community (apart from grouping the people who are members of that community using FOAF or OPML). SIOC allows one to simply define what objects are constituent parts of a community, or to say to what community an object belongs (using sioc:has_part / part_of): users, groups, forums, blogs, etc.
• Shared Topics. Technorati (a search engine for blogs) and BoardTracker (for bulletin boards) have been leveraging the free-text tags that people associate with their posts for some time now. SIOC allows the definition of such tags (using the subject property), but also enables hierarchial or non-hierarchial topic definition of posts using sioc:topic when a topic is ambiguous or more information on a topic is required. Combining with other Semantic Web vocabularies, tags and topics can be further described using the SKOS organisation system.
• One Person, Many User Accounts. SIOC also aims to help the issue of multiple identities by allowing users to define that they hold other accounts or that their accounts belong to a particular personal identity (via foaf:holdsOnlineAccount or sioc:account_of). Therefore, all the posts or comments made by a particular person using their various associated user accounts across platforms could be identified.

One of the great things about the moderate “open data access” that we have today (courtesy of the blogosphere) is the fact that you can observe the crystallization of new thinking, and/or new appreciation of emerging ideas, in near real-time. Of course, when we really hit the tracks with the Semantic Web this will be in “conditional real-time” (i.e. you choose and control your scope and sensitivity to data changes etc..).

For instance, by way of feed subscriptions, I stumbled upon a series of posts by Jason Kolb that basically articulate what I (and others who believe in the Semantic Web vision) have been attempting to convey in a myriad of ways via posts and commentary etc..

Here are the links to the 4 part series by Jason:

1. Reinventing the Internet part 1 (appreciating “Presence” over traditional “Web Sites”)
2. Reinventing the Internet part 2
3. Reinventing the Internet part 3 (appreciating and comprehending URIs)
4. Reinventing the Internet part 4 (nice visualization of what “Data Spaces”)
5. Reinventing the Internet part 5 (everyone will have a Data Space in due course becuase the Internet is really a Federation of Data Spaces)
   

Continuing from our recent Podcast conversation, Jon Udell sheds further insight into the essence of our conversation via a “Strategic Developer” column article titled: Accessing the web of databases.

Below, I present an initial dump of a DataSpace FAQ below that hopefully sheds light on the DataSpace vision espoused during my podcast conversation with Jon.

What is a DataSpace?

A moniker for Web-accessible atomic containers that manage and expose Data, Information, Services, Processes, and Knowledge.

What would you typically find in a Data Space? Examples include:

• Raw Data - SQL, HTML, XML (raw), XHTML, RDF etc.
  
  
• Information (Data In Context) - XHTML (various microformats), Blog Posts (in RSS, Atom, RSS-RDF formats), Subscription Lists (OPML, OCS, etc), Social Networks (FOAF, XFN etc.), and many other forms of applied XML.

• Web Services (Application/Service Logic) - REST or SOAP based invocation of application logic for context sensitive and controlled data access and manipulation.

• Persisted Knowledge - Information in actionable context that is also available in transient or persistent forms expressed using a Graph Data Model. A modern knowledgebase would more than likely have RDF as its Data Language, RDFS as its Schema Language, and OWL as its Domain  Definition (Ontology) Language. Actual Domain, Schema, and Instance Data would be serialized using formats such as RDF-XML, N3, Turtle etc).

How do Data Spaces and Databases differ?
Data Spaces are fundamentally problem-domain-specific database applications. They offer functionality that you would instinctively expect of a database (e.g. AICD data management) with the additonal benefit of being data model and query language agnostic. Data Spaces are for the most part DBMS Engine and Data Access Middleware hybrids in the sense that ownership and control of data is inherently loosely-coupled.

How do Data Spaces and Content Management Systems differ?
Data Spaces are inherently more flexible, they support multiple data models and data representation formats. Content management systems do not possess the same degree of data model and data representation dexterity.

How do Data Spaces and Knowledgebases differ?
A Data Space cannot dictate the perception of its content. For instance, what I may consider as knowledge relative to my Data Space may not be the case to a remote client that interacts with it from a distance, Thus, defining my Data Space as Knowledgebase, purely, introduces constraints that reduce its broader effectiveness to third party clients (applications, services, users etc..). A Knowledgebase is based on a Graph Data Model resulting in significant impedance for clients that are built around alternative models. To reiterate, Data Spaces support multiple data models.

What Architectural Components make up a Data Space?

• ORDBMS Engine - for Data Modeling agility (via complex purpose specific data types and data access methods), Data Atomicity, Data Concurrency, Transaction Isolation, and Durability (aka ACID).
  
  
• Virtual Database Engine - for creating a single view of, and access point to, heterogeneous SQL, XML, Free Text, and other data. This is all about Virtualization at the Data Access Level.

• Web Services Platform - enabling controlled access and manipulation (via application, service, or protocol logic) of Virtualized or Disparate Data. This layer handles the decoupling of functionality from monolithic wholes for function specific invocation via Web Services using either the SOAP or REST approach.

Where can I see a DataSpace along the lines described, in action?

Just look at my blog, and take the journey as follows:

• Front Door (Web 1.0)
• Lounge (Web 2.0) via GData or OpenSearch
• Floor Plan via FOAF or SIOC RDF Data Sets (Graphs)
• Rest of the house (beyond Web 2.0) sending  SPARQL Queries to a SPARQL Endpoint.
  

What about other Data Spaces?

There are several and I will attempt to categorize along the lines of query method available:
Type 1 (Free Text Search over HTTP):
Google, MSN, Yahoo!, Amazon, eBay, and most Web 2.0 plays .

Type 2 (Free Text Search and XQuery/XPath over HTTP)
A few blogs and Wikis (Jon Udell's and a few others)

•    SIOC enabled sites (aka points of semantic web presence)
  
•    PingTheSemantic
  

• My Blog Data Space (as stated earlier in this post)
  
• My General Data Space - (ditto; note that this is currently experimental)
  

What About Data Space aware tools?

•    OpenLink Ajax Toolkit - provides Javascript Control level binding to Query Services such as XMLA for SQL, GData for Free Text, OpenSearch for Free Text, SPARQL for RDF, in addition to service specific Web Services (Web 2.0 hosted solutions that expose service specific APIs)
•    Semantic Radar - a Firefox Extension
•    PingTheSemantic - the Semantic Webs equivalent of Web 2.0's weblogs.com
•    PiggyBank - a Firefox Extension

Web 2.0 Self-Experiment: "

I shopped for everything except food on eBay. When working with foreign-language documents, I used translations from Babel Fish. (This worked only so well. After a Babel Fish round-trip through Italian, the preceding sentence reads, 'That one has only worked therefore well.') Why use up space storing files on my own hard drive when, thanks to certain free utilities, I can store them on Gmail's servers? I saved, sorted, and browsed photos I uploaded to Flickr. I used Skype for my phone calls, decided on books using Amazon's recommendations rather than 'expert' reviews, killed time with videos at YouTube, and listened to music through customizable sites like Pandora and Musicmatch. I kept my schedule on Google Calendar, my to-do list on Voo2do, and my outlines on iOutliner. I voyeured my neighborhood's home values via Zillow. I even used an online service for each stage of the production of this article, culminating in my typing right now in Writely rather than Word. (Being only so confident that Writely wouldn't somehow lose my work -- or as Babel Fish might put it, 'only confident therefore' -- I backed it up into Gmail files.

(Via Valentin Zacharias (Student).)

Tim O'Reilly's response provides the following hierarchy for Web 2.0 based on The what he calls: "Web 2.0-ness":

level 3: The application could ONLY exist on the net, and draws its essential power from the network and the connections it makes possible between people or applications. These are applications that harness network effects to get better the more people use them. EBay, craigslist, Wikipedia, del.icio.us, Skype, (and yes, Dodgeball) meet this test. They are fundamentally driven by shared online activity. The web itself has this character, which Google and other search engines have then leveraged. (You can search on the desktop, but without link activity, many of the techniques that make web search work so well are not available to you.) Web crawling is one of the fundamental Web 2.0 activities, and search applications like Adsense for Content also clearly have Web 2.0 at their heart. I had a conversation with Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, the other day, and he summed up his philosophy and strategy as "Don't fight the internet." In the hierarchy of web 2.0 applications, the highest level is to embrace the network, to understand what creates network effects, and then to harness them in everything you do.

Level 2: The application could exist offline, but it is uniquely advantaged by being online. Flickr is a great example. You can have a local photo management application (like iPhoto) but the application gains remarkable power by leveraging an online community. In fact, the shared photo database, the online community, and the artifacts it creates (like the tag database) is central to what distinguishes Flickr from its offline counterparts. And its fuller embrace of the internet (for example, that the default state of uploaded photos is "public") is what distinguishes it from its online predecessors.

Level 1: The application can and does exist successfully offline, but it gains additional features by being online. Writely is a great example. If you want to do collaborative editing, its online component is terrific, but if you want to write alone, as Fallows did, it gives you little benefit (other than availability from computers other than your own.)

Level 0: The application has primarily taken hold online, but it would work just as well offline if you had all the data in a local cache. MapQuest, Yahoo! Local, and Google Maps are all in this category (but mashups like housingmaps.com are at Level 3.) To the extent that online mapping applications harness user contributions, they jump to Level 2.

So, in a sense we have near conclusive confirmation that Web 2.0 is simply about APIs (typically service specific Data Silos or Walled-gardens) with little concern, understanding, or interest in truly open data access across the burgeoning "Web of Databases". Or the Web of "Databases and Programs" that I prefer to describe as "Data Spaces"

Thus, we can truly begin to conclude that Web 3.0 (Data Web) is the addition of Flexible and Open Data Access to Web 2.0; where the Open Data Access is achieved by leveraging Semantic Web deliverables such as the RDF Data Model and the SPARQL Query Language :-)

"We all know that structured data is boring and useless; while unstructured data is sexy and chock full of value. Well, only up to a point, Lord Copper. Genuinely unstructured data can be a real nuisance - imagine extracting the return address from an unstructured letter, without letterhead and any of the formatting usually applied to letters. A letter may be thought of as unstructured data, but most business letters are, in fact, highly-structured." ....

"The labels "structured data" and "unstructured data" are often used ambiguously by different interest groups; and often used lazily to cover multiple distinct aspects of the issue. In reality, there are at least three orthogonal aspects to structure:

* The structure of the data itself.

* The structure of the container that hosts the data.

* The structure of the access method used to access the data.

These three dimensions are largely independent and one does not need to imply another. For example, it is absolutely feasible and reasonable to store unstructured data in a structured database container and access it by unstructured search mechanisms."

Data understanding and appreciation is dwindling at a time when the reverse should be happening. We are supposed to be in the throws of the "Information Age", but for some reason this appears to have no correlation with data and "data access" in the minds of many -- as reflected in the broad contradictory positions taken re. unstructured data vs structured data, structured is boring and useless while unstructured is useful and sexy....

The difference between "Structured Containers" and "Structured Data" are clearly misunderstood by most (an unfortunate fact).

For instance all DBMS products are "Structured Containers" aligned to one or more data models (typically one). These products have been limited by proprietary data access APIs and underlying data model specificity when used in the "Open-world" model that is at the core of the World Wide Web. This confusion also carries over to the misconception that Web 2.0 and the Semantic/Data Web are mutually exclusive.

But things are changing fast, and the concept of multi-model DBMS products is beginning to crystalize. On our part, we have finally released the long promised "OpenLink Data Spaces" application layer that has been developed using our Virtuoso Universal Server. We have structured unified storage containment exposed to the data web cloud via endpoints for querying or accessing data using a variety of mechanisms that include; GData, OpenSearch, SPARQL, XQuery/XPath, SQL etc..

To be continued....

A quick FYI:
Virtuoso has offered a DBMS hosted Filesystem via WebDAV for a number of years, but the implications of this functionality have remained unclear for just as long. Thus, we developed (a few years ago) and released (recently) an application layer above Virtuoso's WebDAV storage realm called: “The OpenLink Briefcase” (nee. oDrive). This application allows you to view items uploaded by content type and/or kind (People, Business Cards, Calendars, Business Reports, Office Documents, Photos, Blog Posts, Feed Channels/Subscriptions, Bookmarks etc..). it also includes automatic metadata extraction (where feasible) and indexing. Naturally, as an integral part of our “OpenLink Data Spaces” (ODS) product offering, it supports GData, URIQA, SPARQL (note: WebDAV metadata is sync'ed with Virtuoso's RDF Triplestore), SQL, and WebDAV itself.

You can explore the power of this product via the following routes:

1. Download the Virtuoso Open Source Edition and the ODS add-ons or
2. Visit our live demo server (note: this is strictly a demo server with full functionality available) and simply register and then create a “Briefcase” application instance
3. Digest this Briefcase Home Page Screenshot

Here is a simple What and Why guide covering the essence of Data Spaces.

What is a Data Space?

A Data Space is a point of presence on a network, where every Data Object (item or entity) is given a Name (e.g., a URI) by which it may be Referenced or Identified.

In a Data Space, every Representation of those Data Objects (i.e., every Object Representation) has an Address (e.g., a URL) from which it may be Retrieved (or "gotten").

In a Data Space, every Object Representation is a time variant (that is, it changes over time), streamable, and format-agnostic Resource.

An Object Representation is simply a Description of that Object. It takes the form of a graph, pictorially constructed from sets of 3 elements which are themselves named Subject, Predicate, and Object (or SPO); or Entity, Attribute, and Value (or EAV). Each Entity+Attribute+Value or Subject+Predicate+Object set (or triple), is one datum, one piece of data, one persisted observation about a given Subject or Entity.

The underlying Schema that defines and constrains the construction of Object Representations is based on Logic, specifically First-Order Logic. Each Object Representation is a collection of persisted observations (Data) about a given Subject, which aid observers in materializing their perception (Information), and ultimately comprehension (Knowledge), of that Subject.

Why are Data Spaces important?

In the real-world -- which is networked by nature -- data is heterogeneously (or "differently") shaped, and disparately located.

Data has been increasing at an alarming rate since the advent of computing; the interWeb simply provides context that makes this reality more palpable and more exploitable, and in the process virtuously ups the ante through increasingly exponential growth rates.

We can't stop data heterogeneity; it is endemic to the nature of its producers -- humans and/or human-directed machines. What we can do, though, is create a powerful Conceptual-level "bus" or "interface" for data integration, based on Data Description oriented Logic rather than Data Representation oriented Formats. Basically, it's possible for us to use a Common Logic as the basis for expressing and blending SPO- or EAV-based Object Representations in a variety of Formats (or "dialects").

The roadmap boils down to:

1. Assigning unambiguous Object Names to:

   • Every record (or, in table terms, every row);

   • Every record attribute (or, in table terms, every field or column);

   • Every record relationship (that is, every relationship between one record and another);

   • Every record container (e.g., every table or view in a relational database, every named graph, every spreadsheet, every text file, etc.);

2. Making each Object Name resolve to an Address through which Create, Read, Update, and Delete ("CRUD") operations can be performed against (can access) the associated Object Representation graph.

Introducing a new preloaded and preconfigured Virtuoso (Cluster Edition) AMI for the Amazon EC2 Cloud that hosts combined Linked Datasets from:

• DBpedia 3.6
• BBC Programmes
• BBC Music
• BBC Nature
• BBC Food Recipes

Why?

Predictably instantiate a powerful database with high quality data and cross links within minutes, for personal or service specific use.

How?

Simply follow the instructions in our Amazon EC2 guide for the BBC + DBpedia 3.6 Linked Dataset guide.

Your installation steps are as follows:

1. Instantiate a Virtuoso EC2 AMI
2. Mount the Amazon Elastic Block Storage (EBS) snapshot that hosts the preloaded Virtuoso Database.

Related

• BBC Linked Data Spaces Presentation
• BBC Music Linked Dataset Snapshot -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• BBC Programmes Linked Dataset Snapshot -- -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• BBC Nature Linked Dataset Snapshot -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• BBC Food Recipes Snapshot -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• My Del.icio.us bookmark collection re. BBC Linked Data Demos
• Amazon EC2 Snapshots for DBpedia 3.6 + BBC combo -- delivers the BBC and DBpedia dataset combo via a mountable Elastic Block Storage (EBS) device usable with an Amazon Machine Image (AMI)
• Amazon EC2 Snapshots for DBpedia 3.6 & 3.5
• Virtuoso Commercial Edition Download Page
• Virtuoso Cluster Edition Guide

The DBpedia + BBC Combo Linked Dataset is a preconfigured Virtuoso Cluster (4 Virtuoso Cluster Nodes, each comprised of one Virtuoso Instance; initial deployment is to a single Cluster Host, but license may be converted for physically distributed deployment), available via the Amazon EC2 Cloud, preloaded with the following datasets:

• DBpedia 3.6
• BBC Programmes
• BBC Music
• BBC Nature
• BBC Food Recipes

Why?

The BBC has been publishing Linked Data from its Web Data Space for a number of years. In line with best practices for injecting Linked Data into the World Wide Web (Web), the BBC datasets are interlinked with other datasets such as DBpedia and MusicBrainz.

Typical follow-your-nose exploration using a Web Browser (or even via sophisticated SPARQL query crawls) isn't always practical once you get past the initial euphoria that comes from comprehending the Linked Data concept. As your queries get more complex, the overhead of remote sub-queries increases its impact, until query results take so long to return that you simply give up.

Thus, maximizing the effects of the BBC's efforts requires Linked Data that shares locality in a Web-accessible Data Space — i.e., where all Linked Data sets have been loaded into the same data store or warehouse. This holds true even when leveraging SPARQL-FED style virtualization — there's always a need to localize data as part of any marginally-decent locality-aware cost-optimization algorithm.

This DBpedia + BBC dataset, exposed via a preloaded and preconfigured Virtuoso Cluster, delivers a practical point of presence on the Web for immediate and cost-effective exploitation of Linked Data at the individual and/or service specific levels.

How?

Install Virtuoso

1. Download Virtuoso installer archive(s). You must deploy the Personal or Enterprise Edition; the Open Source Edition does not support Shared-Nothing Cluster Deployment.

2. Obtain a Virtuoso Cluster license.

3. Install Virtuoso.

4. Set key environment variables and start the OpenLink License Manager, using command (this may vary depending on your shell and install directory):

   . /opt/virtuoso/virtuoso-enterprise.sh

5. Optional: To keep the default single-server configuration file and demo database intact, set the VIRTUOSO_HOME environment variable to a different directory, e.g.,

   export VIRTUOSO_HOME=/opt/virtuoso/cluster-home/

   Note: You will have to adjust this setting every time you shift between this cluster setup and your single-server setup. Either may be made your environment's default through the virtuoso-enterprise.sh and related scripts.

6. Set up your cluster by running the mkcluster.sh script. Note that initial deployment of the DBpedia + BBC Combo requires a 4 node cluster, which is the default for this script.

7. Start the Virtuoso Cluster with this command:

   virtuoso-start.sh

8. Stop the Virtuoso Cluster with this command:

   virtuoso-stop.sh

Using the DBpedia + BBC Combo dataset

1. Navigate to your installation directory.

2. Download the combo dataset installer script — bbc-dbpedia-install.sh.

3. For best results, set the downloaded script to fully executable using this command:

   chmod 755 bbc-dbpedia-install.sh

4. Shut down any Virtuoso instances that may be currently running.

5. Optional: As above, if you have decided to keep the default single-server configuration file and demo database intact, set the VIRTUOSO_HOME environment variable appropriately, e.g.,

   export VIRTUOSO_HOME=/opt/virtuoso/cluster-home/

6. Run the combo dataset installer script with this command:

   sh bbc-dbpedia-install.sh

Verify installation

The combo dataset typically deploys to EC2 virtual machines in under 90 minutes; your time will vary depending on your network connection speed, machine speed, and other variables.

Once the script completes, perform the following steps:

1. Verify that the Virtuoso Conductor (HTTP-based Admin UI) is in place via:

   http://localhost:[port]/conductor

2. Verify that the Virtuoso SPARQL endpoint is in place via:

   http://localhost:[port]/sparql

3. Verify that the Precision Search & Find UI is in place via:

   http://localhost:[port]/fct

4. Verify that the Virtuoso hosted PivotViewer is in place via:

   http://localhost:[port]/PivotViewer

Related

• BBC Linked Data Spaces Presentation
• BBC Music Linked Dataset Snapshot -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• BBC Programmes Linked Dataset Snapshot -- -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• BBC Nature Linked Dataset Snapshot -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• BBC Food Recipes Snapshot -- PivotViewer Page Screenshot
• My Del.icio.us bookmark collection re. BBC Linked Data Demos
• Amazon EC2 Snapshots for DBpedia 3.6 + BBC combo -- delivers the BBC and DBpedia dataset combo via a mountable Elastic Block Storage (EBS) device usable with an Amazon Machine Image (AMI)
• Amazon EC2 Snapshots for DBpedia 3.6 & 3.5
• Virtuoso Commercial Edition Download Page
• Virtuoso Cluster Edition Guide

A simple guide usable by any Perl developer seeking to exploit SPARQL without hassles.

Why?

SPARQL is a powerful query language, results serialization format, and an HTTP based data access protocol from the W3C. It provides a mechanism for accessing and integrating data across Deductive Database Systems (colloquially referred to as triple or quad stores in Semantic Web and Linked Data circles) -- database systems (or data spaces) that manage proposition oriented records in 3-tuple (triples) or 4-tuple (quads) form.

How?

SPARQL queries are actually HTTP payloads (typically). Thus, using a RESTful client-server interaction pattern, you can dispatch calls to a SPARQL compliant data server and receive a payload for local processing.

Steps:

1. Determine which SPARQL endpoint you want to access e.g. DBpedia or a local Virtuoso instance (typically: http://localhost:8890/sparql).
2. If using Virtuoso, and you want to populate its quad store using SPARQL, assign "SPARQL_SPONGE" privileges to user "SPARQL" (this is basic control, more sophisticated WebID based ACLs are available for controlling SPARQL access).

Script:

#
# Demonstrating use of a single query to populate a 
# Virtuoso Quad Store via Perl. 
#

# 
# HTTP URL is constructed accordingly with CSV query results format as the default via mime type.
#

use CGI qw/:standard/;
use LWP::UserAgent;
use Data::Dumper;
use Text::CSV_XS;

sub sparqlQuery(@args) {
  my $query=shift;
  my $baseURL=shift;
  my $format=shift;
	
	%params=(
		"default-graph" => "", "should-sponge" => "soft", "query" => $query,
		"debug" => "on", "timeout" => "", "format" => $format,
		"save" => "display", "fname" => ""
	);
	
	@fragments=();
	foreach $k (keys %params) {
		$fragment="$k=".CGI::escape($params{$k});
		push(@fragments,$fragment);
	}
	$query=join("&", @fragments);
	
	$sparqlURL="${baseURL}?$query";
	
	my $ua = LWP::UserAgent->new;
	$ua->agent("MyApp/0.1 ");
	my $req = HTTP::Request->new(GET => $sparqlURL);
	my $res = $ua->request($req);
	$str=$res->content;
	
	$csv = Text::CSV_XS->new();
	
	foreach $line ( split(/^/, $str) ) {
		$csv->parse($line);
		@bits=$csv->fields();
	  push(@rows, [ @bits ] );
	}
	return \@rows;
}


# Setting Data Source Name (DSN)

$dsn="http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia";

# Virtuoso pragmas for instructing SPARQL engine to perform an HTTP GET using the IRI in
# FROM clause as Data Source URL en route to DBMS
# record Inserts.

$query="DEFINE get:soft \"replace\"\n

# Generic (non Virtuoso specific SPARQL
# Note: this will not add records to the 
# DBMS 

SELECT DISTINCT * FROM <$dsn> WHERE {?s ?p ?o}"; 

$data=sparqlQuery($query, "http://localhost:8890/sparql/", "text/csv");

print "Retrieved data:\n";
print Dumper($data);

Output

Retrieved data:
$VAR1 = [
          [
            's',
            'p',
            'o'
          ],
          [
            'http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia',
            'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type',
            'http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing'
          ],
          [
            'http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia',
            'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type',
            'http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Work'
          ],
          [
            'http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia',
            'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type',
            'http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Software106566077'
          ],
...

Conclusion

CSV was chosen over XML (re. output format) since this is about a "no-brainer installation and utilization" guide for a Perl developer that already knows how to use Perl for HTTP based data access within HTML. SPARQL just provides an added bonus to URL dexterity (delivered via URI abstraction) with regards to constructing Data Source Names or Addresses.

Related

• RDF::Query::Client Guide
• SPARQL Guide for the Perl Developer
• SPARQL Guide for the PHP Developer
• SPARQL Guide for the Python Developer
• SPARQL Guide for the Ruby Developer
• Simple Guide for using SPARQL with Virtuoso
• General SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• Virtuoso Specific SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• The URI, URL, and Linked Data Meme's Generic HTTP URI.

A simple guide usable by any Javascript developer seeking to exploit SPARQL without hassles.

Why?

SPARQL is a powerful query language, results serialization format, and an HTTP based data access protocol from the W3C. It provides a mechanism for accessing and integrating data across Deductive Database Systems (colloquially referred to as triple or quad stores in Semantic Web and Linked Data circles) -- database systems (or data spaces) that manage proposition oriented records in 3-tuple (triples) or 4-tuple (quads) form.

How?

SPARQL queries are actually HTTP payloads (typically). Thus, using a RESTful client-server interaction pattern, you can dispatch calls to a SPARQL compliant data server and receive a payload for local processing.

Steps:

1. Determine which SPARQL endpoint you want to access e.g. DBpedia or a local Virtuoso instance (typically: http://localhost:8890/sparql).
2. If using Virtuoso, and you want to populate its quad store using SPARQL, assign "SPARQL_SPONGE" privileges to user "SPARQL" (this is basic control, more sophisticated WebID based ACLs are available for controlling SPARQL access).

Script:

/*
Demonstrating use of a single query to populate a # Virtuoso Quad Store via Javascript. 
*/

/* 
HTTP URL is constructed accordingly with JSON query results format as the default via mime type.
*/

function sparqlQuery(query, baseURL, format) {
	if(!format)
		format="application/json";
	var params={
		"default-graph": "", "should-sponge": "soft", "query": query,
		"debug": "on", "timeout": "", "format": format,
		"save": "display", "fname": ""
	};
	
	var querypart="";
	for(var k in params) {
		querypart+=k+"="+encodeURIComponent(params[k])+"&";
	}
	var queryURL=baseURL + '?' + querypart;
	if (window.XMLHttpRequest) {
  	xmlhttp=new XMLHttpRequest();
  }
  else {
  	xmlhttp=new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");
  }
  xmlhttp.open("GET",queryURL,false);
  xmlhttp.send();
  return JSON.parse(xmlhttp.responseText);
}

/*
setting Data Source Name (DSN)
*/

var dsn="http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia";

/*
Virtuoso pragma "DEFINE get:soft "replace" instructs Virtuoso SPARQL engine to perform an HTTP GET using the IRI in FROM clause as Data Source URL with regards to 
DBMS record inserts
*/

var query="DEFINE get:soft \"replace\"\nSELECT DISTINCT * FROM <"+dsn+"> WHERE {?s ?p ?o}"; 
var data=sparqlQuery(query, "/sparql/");

Output

Place the snippet above into the <script/> section of an HTML document to see the query result.

Conclusion

JSON was chosen over XML (re. output format) since this is about a "no-brainer installation and utilization" guide for a Javascript developer that already knows how to use Javascript for HTTP based data access within HTML. SPARQL just provides an added bonus to URL dexterity (delivered via URI abstraction) with regards to constructing Data Source Names or Addresses.

Related

• SPARQL Guide for the PHP Developer
• SPARQL Guide for the Python Developer
• SPARQL Guide for the Ruby Developer
• Simple Guide for using SPARQL with Virtuoso
• General SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• Virtuoso Specific SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• The URI, URL, and Linked Data Meme's Generic HTTP URI.

A simple guide usable by any PHP developer seeking to exploit SPARQL without hassles.

Why?

SPARQL is a powerful query language, results serialization format, and an HTTP based data access protocol from the W3C. It provides a mechanism for accessing and integrating data across Deductive Database Systems (colloquially referred to as triple or quad stores in Semantic Web and Linked Data circles) -- database systems (or data spaces) that manage proposition oriented records in 3-tuple (triples) or 4-tuple (quads) form.

How?

SPARQL queries are actually HTTP payloads (typically). Thus, using a RESTful client-server interaction pattern, you can dispatch calls to a SPARQL compliant data server and receive a payload for local processing e.g. local object binding re. PHP.

Steps:

1. From your command line execute: aptitude search '^PHP26', to verify PHP is in place
2. Determine which SPARQL endpoint you want to access e.g. DBpedia or a local Virtuoso instance (typically: http://localhost:8890/sparql).
3. If using Virtuoso, and you want to populate its quad store using SPARQL, assign "SPARQL_SPONGE" privileges to user "SPARQL" (this is basic control, more sophisticated WebID based ACLs are available for controlling SPARQL access).

Script:

#!/usr/bin/env php
<?php
#
# Demonstrating use of a single query to populate a # Virtuoso Quad Store via PHP. 
#

# HTTP URL is constructed accordingly with JSON query results format in mind.

function sparqlQuery($query, $baseURL, $format="application/json")

  {
	$params=array(
		"default-graph" =>  "",
		"should-sponge" =>  "soft",
		"query" =>  $query,
		"debug" =>  "on",
		"timeout" =>  "",
		"format" =>  $format,
		"save" =>  "display",
		"fname" =>  ""
	);

	$querypart="?";	
	foreach($params as $name => $value) 
  {
		$querypart=$querypart . $name . '=' . urlencode($value) . "&";
	}
	
	$sparqlURL=$baseURL . $querypart;
	
	return json_decode(file_get_contents($sparqlURL));
};



# Setting Data Source Name (DSN)
$dsn="http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia";

#Virtuoso pragmas for instructing SPARQL engine to perform an HTTP GET
#using the IRI in FROM clause as Data Source URL

$query="DEFINE get:soft \"replace\"
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM <$dsn> WHERE {?s ?p ?o}"; 

$data=sparqlQuery($query, "http://localhost:8890/sparql/");

print "Retrieved data:\n" . json_encode($data);

?>

Output

Retrieved data:
  {"head":
  {"link":[],"vars":["s","p","o"]},
  "results":
		{"distinct":false,"ordered":true,
		"bindings":[
			{"s":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/dbpedia.org\/resource\/DBpedia"},"p":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/02\/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type"},"o":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2002\/07\/owl#Thing"}},
			{"s":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/dbpedia.org\/resource\/DBpedia"},"p":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/02\/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type"},"o":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/dbpedia.org\/ontology\/Work"}},
			{"s":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/dbpedia.org\/resource\/DBpedia"},"p":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/1999\/02\/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type"},"o":
			{"type":"uri","value":"http:\/\/dbpedia.org\/class\/yago\/Software106566077"}},
...

Conclusion

JSON was chosen over XML (re. output format) since this is about a "no-brainer installation and utilization" guide for a PHP developer that already knows how to use PHP for HTTP based data access. SPARQL just provides an added bonus to URL dexterity (delivered via URI abstraction) with regards to constructing Data Source Names or Addresses.

Related

• SPARQL Guide for the Python Developer
• SPARQL Guide for the Ruby Developer
• Simple Guide for using SPARQL with Virtuoso
• General SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• Virtuoso Specific SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• The URI, URL, and Linked Data Meme's Generic HTTP URI.

A simple guide usable by any Python developer seeking to exploit SPARQL without hassles.

Why?

SPARQL is a powerful query language, results serialization format, and an HTTP based data access protocol from the W3C. It provides a mechanism for accessing and integrating data across Deductive Database Systems (colloquially referred to as triple or quad stores in Semantic Web and Linked Data circles) -- database systems (or data spaces) that manage proposition oriented records in 3-tuple (triples) or 4-tuple (quads) form.

How?

SPARQL queries are actually HTTP payloads (typically). Thus, using a RESTful client-server interaction pattern, you can dispatch calls to a SPARQL compliant data server and receive a payload for local processing e.g. local object binding re. Python.

Steps:

1. From your command line execute: aptitude search '^python26', to verify Python is in place
2. Determine which SPARQL endpoint you want to access e.g. DBpedia or a local Virtuoso instance (typically: http://localhost:8890/sparql).
3. If using Virtuoso, and you want to populate its quad store using SPARQL, assign "SPARQL_SPONGE" privileges to user "SPARQL" (this is basic control, more sophisticated WebID based ACLs are available for controlling SPARQL access).

Script:

#!/usr/bin/env python
#
# Demonstrating use of a single query to populate a # Virtuoso Quad Store via Python. 
#

import urllib, json

# HTTP URL is constructed accordingly with JSON query results format in mind.

def sparqlQuery(query, baseURL, format="application/json"):
	params={
		"default-graph": "",
		"should-sponge": "soft",
		"query": query,
		"debug": "on",
		"timeout": "",
		"format": format,
		"save": "display",
		"fname": ""
	}
	querypart=urllib.urlencode(params)
	response = urllib.urlopen(baseURL,querypart).read()
	return json.loads(response)

# Setting Data Source Name (DSN)
dsn="http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia"

# Virtuoso pragmas for instructing SPARQL engine to perform an HTTP GET
# using the IRI in FROM clause as Data Source URL

query="""DEFINE get:soft "replace"
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM <%s> WHERE {?s ?p ?o}""" % dsn 

data=sparqlQuery(query, "http://localhost:8890/sparql/")

print "Retrieved data:\n" + json.dumps(data, sort_keys=True, indent=4)

#
# End

Output

Retrieved data:
{
    "head": {
        "link": [], 
        "vars": [
            "s", 
            "p", 
            "o"
        ]
    }, 
    "results": {
        "bindings": [
            {
                "o": {
                    "type": "uri", 
                    "value": "http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing"
                }, 
                "p": {
                    "type": "uri", 
                    "value": "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type"
                }, 
                "s": {
                    "type": "uri", 
                    "value": "http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia"
                }
            }, 
...

Conclusion

JSON was chosen over XML (re. output format) since this is about a "no-brainer installation and utilization" guide for a Python developer that already knows how to use Python for HTTP based data access. SPARQL just provides an added bonus to URL dexterity (delivered via URI abstraction) with regards to constructing Data Source Names or Addresses.

Related

• SPARQL Guide for the Ruby Developer
• Simple Guide for using SPARQL with Virtuoso
• General SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• Virtuoso Specific SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• The URI, URL, and Linked Data Meme's Generic HTTP URI.

A simple guide usable by any Ruby developer seeking to exploit SPARQL without hassles.

Why?

SPARQL is a powerful query language, results serialization format, and an HTTP based data access protocol from the W3C. It provides a mechanism for accessing and integrating data across Deductive Database Systems (colloquially referred to as triple or quad stores in Semantic Web and Linked Data circles) -- database systems (or data spaces) that manage proposition oriented records in 3-tuple (triples) or 4-tuple (quads) form.

How?

SPARQL queries are actually HTTP payloads (typically). Thus, using a RESTful client-server interaction pattern, you can dispatch calls to a SPARQL compliant data server and receive a payload for local processing e.g. local object binding re. Ruby.

Steps:

1. From your command line execute: aptitude search '^ruby', to verify Ruby is in place
2. Determine which SPARQL endpoint you want to access e.g. DBpedia or a local Virtuoso instance (typically: http://localhost:8890/sparql).
3. If using Virtuoso, and you want to populate its quad store using SPARQL, assign "SPARQL_SPONGE" privileges to user "SPARQL" (this is basic control, more sophisticated WebID based ACLs are available for controlling SPARQL access).

Script:

#!/usr/bin/env ruby
#
# Demonstrating use of a single query to populate a # Virtuoso Quad Store. 
#

require 'net/http'
require 'cgi'
require 'csv'

#
# We opt for CSV based output since handling this format is straightforward in Ruby, by default.
# HTTP URL is constructed accordingly with CSV as query results format in mind.

def sparqlQuery(query, baseURL, format="text/csv")
	params={
		"default-graph" => "",
		"should-sponge" => "soft",
		"query" => query,
		"debug" => "on",
		"timeout" => "",
		"format" => format,
		"save" => "display",
		"fname" => ""
	}
	querypart=""
	params.each { |k,v|
		querypart+="#{k}=#{CGI.escape(v)}&"
	}
  
	sparqlURL=baseURL+"?#{querypart}"
	
	response = Net::HTTP.get_response(URI.parse(sparqlURL))

	return CSV::parse(response.body)
	
end

# Setting Data Source Name (DSN)

dsn="http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia"

#Virtuoso pragmas for instructing SPARQL engine to perform an HTTP GET
#using the IRI in FROM clause as Data Source URL

query="DEFINE get:soft \"replace\"
SELECT DISTINCT * FROM <#{dsn}> WHERE {?s ?p ?o} "

#Assume use of local installation of Virtuoso 
#otherwise you can change URL to that of a public endpoint
#for example DBpedia: http://dbpedia.org/sparql

data=sparqlQuery(query, "http://localhost:8890/sparql/")

puts "Got data:"
p data

#
# End

Output

Got data:
[["s", "p", "o"], 
  ["http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia", 
   "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type", 
   "http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Thing"], 
  ["http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia", 
   "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type", 
   "http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Work"], 
  ["http://dbpedia.org/resource/DBpedia", 
   "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type", 
   "http://dbpedia.org/class/yago/Software106566077"],
...

Conclusion

CSV was chosen over XML (re. output format) since this is about a "no-brainer installation and utilization" guide for a Ruby developer that already knows how to use Ruby for HTTP based data access. SPARQL just provides an added bonus to URL dexterity (delivered via URI abstraction) with regards to constructing Data Source Names or Addresses.

Related

• SPARQL and Ruby SPARQL Client Library Example
• Simple Guide for using SPARQL with Virtuoso
• General SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• Virtuoso Specific SPARQL Tutorial Collection
• The URI, URL, and Linked Data Meme's Generic HTTP URI.

A declarative query language from the W3C for querying structured propositional data (in the form of 3-tuple [triples] or 4-tuple [quads] records) stored in a deductive database (colloquially referred to as triple or quad stores in Semantic Web and Linked Data parlance).

SPARQL is inherently platform independent. Like SQL, the query language and the backend database engine are distinct. Database clients capture SPARQL queries which are then passed on to compliant backend databases.

Why is it important?

Like SQL for relational databases, it provides a powerful mechanism for accessing and joining data across one or more data partitions (named graphs identified by IRIs). The aforementioned capability also enables the construction of sophisticated Views, Reports (HTML or those produced in native form by desktop productivity tools), and data streams for other services.

Unlike SQL, SPARQL includes result serialization formats and an HTTP based wire protocol. Thus, the ubiquity and sophistication of HTTP is integral to SPARQL i.e., client side applications (user agents) only need to be able to perform an HTTP GET against a URL en route to exploiting the power of SPARQL.

How do I use it, generally?

1. Locate a SPARQL endpoint (DBpedia, LOD Cloud Cache, Data.Gov, URIBurner, others), or;
2. Install a SPARQL compliant database server (quad or triple store) on your desktop, workgroup server, data center, or cloud (e.g., Amazon EC2 AMI)
3. Start the database server
4. Execute SPARQL Queries via the SPARQL endpoint.

How do I use SPARQL with Virtuoso?

What follows is a very simple guide for using SPARQL against your own instance of Virtuoso:

1. Software Download and Installation
2. Data Loading from Data Sources exposed at Network Addresses (e.g. HTTP URLs) using very simple methods
3. Actual SPARQL query execution via SPARQL endpoint.

Installation Steps

1. Download Virtuoso Open Source or Virtuoso Commercial Editions
2. Run installer (if using Commercial edition of Windows Open Source Edition, otherwise follow build guide)
3. Follow post-installation guide and verify installation by typing in the command: virtuoso -? (if this fails check you've followed installation and setup steps, then verify environment variables have been set)
4. Start the Virtuoso server using the command: virtuoso-start.sh
5. Verify you have a connection to the Virtuoso Server via the command: isql localhost (assuming you're using default DB settings) or the command: isql localhost:1112 (assuming demo database) or goto your browser and type in: http://<virtuoso-server-host-name>:[port]/conductor (e.g. http://localhost:8889/conductor for default DB or http://localhost:8890/conductor if using Demo DB)
6. Go to SPARQL endpoint which is typically -- http://<virtuoso-server-host-name>:[port]/sparql
7. Run a quick sample query (since the database always has system data in place): select distinct * where {?s ?p ?o} limit 50 .

Troubleshooting

1. Ensure environment settings are set and functional -- if using Mac OS X or Windows, so you don't have to worry about this, just start and stop your Virtuoso server using native OS services applets
2. If using the Open Source Edition, follow the getting started guide -- it covers PATH and startup directory location re. starting and stopping Virtuoso servers.
3. Sponging (HTTP GETs against external Data Sources) within SPARQL queries is disabled by default. You can enable this feature by assigning "SPARQL_SPONGE" privileges to user "SPARQL". Note, more sophisticated security exists via WebID based ACLs.

Data Loading Steps

1. Identify an RDF based structured data source of interest -- a file that contains 3-tuple / triples available at an address on a public or private HTTP based network
2. Determine the Address (URL) of the RDF data source
3. Go to your Virtuoso SPARQL endpoint and type in the following SPARQL query: DEFINE GET:SOFT "replace" SELECT DISTINCT * FROM <RDFDataSourceURL> WHERE {?s ?p ?o}
4. All the triples in the RDF resource (data source accessed via URL) will be loaded into the Virtuoso Quad Store (using RDF Data Source URL as the internal quad store Named Graph IRI) as part of the SPARQL query processing pipeline.

Note: the data source URL doesn't even have to be RDF based -- which is where the Virtuoso Sponger Middleware comes into play (download and install the VAD installer package first) since it delivers the following features to Virtuoso's SPARQL engine:

1. Transformation of data from non RDF data sources (file content, hypermedia resources, web services output etc..) into RDF based 3-tuples (triples)
2. Cache Invalidation Scheme Construction -- thus, subsequent queries (without the define get:soft "replace" pragma will not be required bar when you forcefully want to override cache).
3. If you have very large data sources like DBpedia etc. from CKAN, simply use our bulk loader .

SPARQL Endpoint Discovery

Public SPARQL endpoints are emerging at an ever increasing rate. Thus, we've setup up a DNS lookup service that provides access to a large number of SPARQL endpoints. Of course, this doesn't cover all existing endpoints, so if our endpoint is missing please ping me.

Here are a collection of commands for using DNS-SD to discover SPARQL endpoints:

1. dns-sd -B _sparql._tcp sparql.openlinksw.com -- browse for services instances
2. dns-sd -Z _sparql._tcp sparql.openlinksw.com -- output results in Zone File format

Related

1. Using HTTP from Ruby -- you can just make SPARQL Protocol URLs re. SPARQL
2. Using SPARQL Endpoints via Ruby -- Ruby example using DBpedia endpoint
3. Interactive SPARQL Query By Example (QBE) tool -- provides a graphical user interface (as is common in SQL realm re. query building against RDBMS engines) that works with any SPARQL endpoint
4. Other methods of loading RDF data into Virtuoso
5. Virtuoso Sponger -- architecture and how it turns a wide variety of non RDF data sources into SPARQL accessible data
6. Using OpenLink Data Explorer (ODE) to populate Virtuoso -- locate a resource of interest; click on a bookmarklet or use context menus (if using ODE extensions for Firefox, Safari, or Chrome); and you'll have SPARQL accessible data automatically inserted into your Virtuoso instance.
7. W3C's SPARQLing Data Access Ingenuity -- an older generic SPARQL introduction post
8. Collection of SPARQL Query Examples -- GoodRelations (Product Offers), FOAF (Profiles), SIOC (Data Spaces -- Blogs, Wikis, Bookmarks, Feed Collections, Photo Galleries, Briefcase/DropBox, AddressBook, Calendars, Discussion Forums)
9. Collection of Live SPARQL Queries against LOD Cloud Cache -- simple and advanced queries.

Linked Data offers everyone a Web-scale, Enterprise-grade mechanism for platform-independent creation, curation, access, and integration of data.

The fundamental steps to creating Linked Data are as follows:

1. Choose a Name Reference Mechanism — i.e., URIs.

2. Choose a Data Model with which to Structure your Data — minimally, you need a model which clearly distinguishes

   1. Subjects (also known as Entities)
   2. Subject Attributes (also known as Entity Attributes), and
   3. Attribute Values (also known as Subject Attribute Values or Entity Attribute Values).

3. Choose one or more Data Representation Syntaxes (also called Markup Languages or Data Formats) to use when creating Resources with Content based on your chosen Data Model. Some Syntaxes in common use today are HTML+RDFa, N3, Turtle, RDF/XML, TriX, XRDS, GData, OData, OpenGraph, and many others.

4. Choose a URI Scheme that facilitates binding Referenced Names to the Resources which will carry your Content -- your Structured Data.

5. Create Structured Data by using your chosen Name Reference Mechanism, your chosen Data Model, and your chosen Data Representation Syntax, as follows:

   1. Identify Subject(s) using Resolvable URI(s).
   2. Identify Subject Attribute(s) using Resolvable URI(s).
   3. Assign Attribute Values to Subject Attributes. These Values may be either Literals (e.g., STRINGs, BLOBs) or Resolvable URIs.

You can create Linked Data (hypermedia-based data representations) Resources from or for many things. Examples include: personal profiles, calendars, address books, blogs, photo albums; there are many, many more.

Related

1. Linked Data an Introduction -- simple introduction to Linked Data and its virtues
2. How Data Makes Corporations Dumb -- Jeff Jonas (IBM) interview
3. Hypermedia Types -- evolving information portal covering different aspects of Hypermedia resource types
4. URIBurner -- service that generates Linked Data from a plethora of heterogeneous data sources
5. Linked Data Meme -- TimbL design issues note about Linked Data
6. Data 3.0 Manifesto -- note about format agnostic Linked Data
7. DBpedia -- large Linked Data Hub
8. Linked Open Data Cloud -- collection of Linked Data Spaces
9. Linked Open Commerce Cloud -- commerce (clicks & mortar and/or clicks & clicks) oriented Linked Data Space
10. LOD Cloud Cache -- massive Linked Data Space hosting most of the LOD Cloud Datasets
11. LOD2 Initiative -- EU Co-Funded Project to develop global knowledge space from LOD
.

1. Structured & Platform Independent Enterprise Data Virtualization -- concrete conceptual level access and provisioning of abstract domain entities such as Customers, Orders, Employees, Products, Countries, Competitors etc.
2. Distributed Application State (REST) -- application state transitions via links
3. Structured Data Representation (Linked Data) -- whole data data representation via links
4. Structured Identity (WebID) -- verifiable distributed identity
5. Structured Profiles (FOAF) -- platform independent profiles for people and organizations
6. Articulation of Structured Value Propositions (GoodRelations) -- Product & Service Offers, Business Entities, Locations, Business Hours, etc.
7. Structured Collaboration Spaces (SIOC) -- Blogs, Wikis, File Sharing, Discussion Forums, Aggregated Feeds, Statuses, Photo Galleries, Polls etc.

1. Identity -- via Resolvable URIs based Names for everything
2. Data Representation Format Dexterity -- e.g., HTTP based Content Negotiation which loosens the coupling between Data Model Semantics and actual Data Representation (Syntax/Markup)
3. Platform Agnostic Data Access -- e.g. via ubiquitous HTTP
4. Change Sensitivity -- data warehouses are like real-world warehouses, goods rot and perish overtime
5. Provenance -- data about the data (metadata) that helps establish "Who", "What", "When", "Where", and at least approximate or guesstimate "Why"
6. Data Mesh Navigability -- delivered via inference rules.

The quality of service factors above nullify many of the typical concerns associated data driven business models, such as:

• Wholesale Imports (crawls) - where your data is crawled and/or imported wholesale into a new data space with zero attribution to the source
• Lossy Attribution -- attribution is delivered in literal form which doesn't deliver branding fidelity across many value chain layers or entire life cycle of a given data item
• Service Provisioning -- effectively build any business model if you can align services with unambiguously identifiable consumers with actual data items or across entire data spaces.

Linked Data offers everyone a Web-scale, Enterprise-grade mechanism for platform-independent creation, curation, access, and integration of data.

The fundamental steps to creating Linked Data are as follows:

1. Choose a Name Reference Mechanism — i.e., URIs.

2. Choose a Data Model with which to Structure your Data — minimally, you need a model which clearly distinguishes

   1. Subjects (also known as Entities)
   2. Subject Attributes (also known as Entity Attributes), and
   3. Attribute Values (also known as Subject Attribute Values or Entity Attribute Values).

3. Choose one or more Data Representation Syntaxes (also called Markup Languages or Data Formats) to use when creating Resources with Content based on your chosen Data Model. Some Syntaxes in common use today are HTML+RDFa, N3, Turtle, RDF/XML, TriX, XRDS, GData, and OData; there are many others.

4. Choose a URI Scheme that facilitates binding Referenced Names to the Resources which will carry your Content -- your Structured Data.

5. Create Structured Data by using your chosen Name Reference Mechanism, your chosen Data Model, and your chosen Data Representation Syntax, as follows:

   1. Identify Subject(s) using Resolvable URI(s).
   2. Identify Subject Attribute(s) using Resolvable URI(s).
   3. Assign Attribute Values to Subject Attributes. These Values may be either Literals (e.g., STRINGs, BLOBs) or Resolvable URIs.

You can create Linked Data (hypermedia-based data representations) Resources from or for many things. Examples include: personal profiles, calendars, address books, blogs, photo albums; there are many, many more.

Related

1. Hypermedia Types -- evolving information portal covering different aspects of Hypermedia resource types
2. URIBurner -- service that generates Linked Data from a plethora of heterogeneous data sources
3. Linked Data Meme -- TimbL design issues note about Linked Data
4. Data 3.0 Manifesto -- note about format agnostic Linked Data
5. DBpedia -- large Linked Data Hub
6. Linked Open Data Cloud -- collection of Linked Data Spaces
7. Linked Open Commerce Cloud -- commerce (clicks & mortar and/or clicks & clicks) oriented Linked Data Space
8. LOD Cloud Cache -- massive Linked Data Space hosting most of the LOD Cloud Datasets
9. LOD2 Initiative -- EU Co-Funded Project to develop global knowledge space from LOD
.

A service from OpenLink Software, available at: http://uriburner.com, that enables anyone to generate structured descriptions -on the fly- for resources that are already published to HTTP based networks. These descriptions exist as hypermedia resource representations where links are used to identify:

• the entity (data object or datum) being described,
• each of its attributes, and
• each of its attributes values (optionally).

The hypermedia resource representation outlined above is what is commonly known as an Entity-Attribute-Value (EAV) Graph. The use of generic HTTP scheme based Identifiers is what distinguishes this type of hypermedia resource from others.

Why is it Important?

The virtues (dual pronged serendipitous discovery) of publishing HTTP based Linked Data across public (World Wide Web) or private (Intranets and/or Extranets) is rapidly becoming clearer to everyone. That said, the nuance laced nature of Linked Data publishing presents significant challenges to most. Thus, for Linked Data to really blossom the process of publishing needs to be simplified i.e., "just click and go" (for human interaction) or REST-ful orchestration of HTTP CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) operations between Client Applications and Linked Data Servers.

How Do I Use It?

In similar vane to the role played by FeedBurner with regards to Atom and RSS feed generation, during the early stages of the Blogosphere, it enables anyone to publish Linked Data bearing hypermedia resources on an HTTP network. Thus, its usage covers two profiles: Content Publisher and Content Consumer.

Content Publisher

The steps that follow cover all you need to do:

• place a tag within your HTTP based hypermedia resource (e.g. within section for HTML )
• use a URL via the @href attribute value to identify the location of the structured description of your resource, in this case it takes the form: http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/{scheme-or-protocol}/{your-hostname-or-authority}/{your-local-resource}
• for human visibility you may consider adding associating a button (as you do with Atom and RSS) with the URL above.

That's it! The discoverability (SDQ) of your content has just multiplied significantly, its structured description is now part of the Linked Data Cloud with a reference back to your site (which is now a bona fide HTTP based Linked Data Space).

Examples

HTML+RDFa based representation of a structured resource description:

<link rel="describedby" title="Resource Description (HTML)"type="text/html" href="http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/http/example.org/xyz.html"/>

JSON based representation of a structured resource description:

<link rel="describedby" title="Resource Description (JSON)" type="application/json" href="http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/http/example.org/xyz.html"/>

N3 based representation of a structured resource description:

<link rel="describedby" title="Resource Description (N3)" type="text/n3" href="http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/http/example.org/xyz.html"/>

RDF/XML based representations of a structured resource description:

<link rel="describedby" title="Resource Description (RDF/XML)" type="application/rdf+xml" href="http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/http/example.org/xyz.html"/>

Content Consumer

As an end-user, obtaining a structured description of any resource published to an HTTP network boils down to the following steps:

1. go to: http://uriburner.com
2. drag the Page Metadata Bookmarklet link to your Browser's toolbar
3. whenever you encounter a resource of interest (e.g. an HTML page) simply click on the Bookmarklet
4. you will be presented with an HTML representation of a structured resource description (i.e., identifier of the entity being described, its attributes, and its attribute values will be clearly presented).

Examples

• Description of a Book culled from an Amazon web page
• Description of a product offering culled from a BestBuy web page
• Description of a product (a camera) culled from a CNET web page
• Description of the same CNET product as an Offer on eBay (exposed by the description above via seeAlso property value).

If you are a developer, you can simply perform an HTTP operation request (from your development environment of choice) using any of the URL patterns presented below:

• curl -I -H "Accept: text/html" http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}

JSON:

• curl -I -H "Accept: application/json" http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}
• curl http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/data/json/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}

Notation 3 (N3):

• curl -I -H "Accept: text/n3" http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}
• curl http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/data/n3/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}

• curl -I -H "Accept: text/turtle" http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}
• curl http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/data/ttl/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}

RDF/XML:

• curl -I -H "Accept: application/rdf+xml" http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/id/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}
• curl http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/data/xml/{scheme}/{authority}/{local-path}

Conclusion

URIBurner is a "deceptively simple" solution for cost-effective exploitation of HTTP based Linked Data meshes. It doesn't require any programming or customization en route to immediately realizing its virtues.

If you like what URIBurner offers, but prefer to leverage its capabilities within your domain -- such that resource description URLs reside in your domain, all you have to do is perform the following steps:

1. download a copy of Virtuoso (for local desktop, workgroup, or data center installation) or
2. instantiate Virtuoso via the Amazon EC2 Cloud
3. enable the Sponger Middleware component via the RDF Mapper VAD package (which includes cartridges for over 30 different resources types)

When you install your own URIBurner instances, you also have the ability to perform customizations that increase resource description fidelity in line with your specific needs. All you need to do is develop a custom extractor cartridge and/or meta cartridge.

Related:

• Virtuoso Sponger Middleware -- (technology behind URIBurner Service)
• Animation demonstrating how the Virtuoso Sponger works.

At the end of the marathon session, it was clear to me that a blog post was required for future reference, at the very least :-)

What is Linked Data?

"Data Access by Reference" mechanism for Data Objects (or Entities) on HTTP networks. It enables you to Identify a Data Object and Access its structured Data Representation via a single Generic HTTP scheme based Identifier (HTTP URI). Data Object representation formats may vary; but in all cases, they are hypermedia oriented, fully structured, and negotiable within the context of a client-server message exchange.

Why is it Important?

Information makes the world tick!

Information doesn't exist without data to contextualize.

Information is inaccessible without a projection (presentation) medium.

All information (without exception, when produced by humans) is subjective. Thus, to truly maximize the innate heterogeneity of collective human intelligence, loose coupling of our information and associated data sources is imperative.

How is Linked Data Delivered?

Linked Data is exposed to HTTP networks (e.g. World Wide Web) via hypermedia resources bearing structured representations of data object descriptions. Remember, you have a single Identifier abstraction (generic HTTP URI) that embodies: Data Object Name and Data Representation Location (aka URL).

How are Linked Data Object Representations Structured?

A structured representation of data exists when an Entity (Datum), its Attributes, and its Attribute Values are clearly discernible. In the case of a Linked Data Object, structured descriptions take the form of a hypermedia based Entity-Attribute-Value (EAV) graph pictorial -- where each Entity, its Attributes, and its Attribute Values (optionally) are identified using Generic HTTP URIs.

Examples of structured data representation formats (content types) associated with Linked Data Objects include:

• text/html
• text/turtle
• text/n3
• application/json
• application/rdf+xml
• Others

How Do I Create Linked Data oriented Hypermedia Resources?

You markup resources by expressing distinct entity-attribute-value statements (basically these a 3-tuple records) using a variety of notations:

• (X)HTML+RDFa,
• JSON,
• Turtle,
• N3,
• TriX,
• TriG,
• RDF/XML, and
• Others (for instance you can use Atom data format extensions to model EAV graph as per OData initiative from Microsoft).

You can achieve this task using any of the following approaches:

• Notepad
• WYSIWYG Editor
• Transformation of Database Records via Middleware
• Transformation of XML based Web Services output via Middleware
• Transformation of other Hypermedia Resources via Middleware
• Transformation of non Hypermedia Resources via Middleware
• Use a platform that delivers all of the above.

Practical Examples of Linked Data Objects Enable

• Describe Who You Are, What You Offer, and What You Need via your structured profile, then leave your HTTP network to perform the REST (serendipitous discovery of relevant things)
• Identify (via map overlay) all items of interest based on a 2km+ radious of my current location (this could include vendor offerings or services sought by existing or future customers)
• Share the latest and greatest family photos with family members *only* without forcing them to signup for Yet Another Web 2.0 service or Social Network
• No repetitive signup and username and password based login sequences per Web 2.0 or Mobile Application combo
• Going beyond imprecise Keyword Search to the new frontier of Precision Find - Example, Find Data Objects associated with the keywords: Tiger, while enabling the seeker disambiguate across the "Who", "What", "Where", "When" dimensions (with negation capability)
• Determine how two Data Objects are Connected - person to person, person to subject matter etc. (LinkedIn outside the walled garden)
• Use any resource address (e.g blog or bookmark URL) as the conduit into a Data Object mesh that exposes all associated Entities and their social network relationships
• Apply patterns (social dimensions) above to traditional enterprise data sources in combination (optionally) with external data without compromising security etc.

How Do OpenLink Software Products Enable Linked Data Exploitation?

Our data access middleware heritage (which spans 16+ years) has enabled us to assemble a rich portfolio of coherently integrated products that enable cost-effective evaluation and utilization of Linked Data, without writing a single line of code, or exposing you to the hidden, but extensive admin and configuration costs. Post installation, the benefits of Linked Data simply materialize (along the lines described above).

Our main Linked Data oriented products include:

• OpenLink Data Explorer -- visualizes Linked Data or Linked Data transformed "on the fly" from hypermedia and non hypermedia data sources
• URIBurner -- a "deceptively simple" solution that enables the generation of Linked Data "on the fly" from a broad collection of data sources and resource types
• OpenLink Data Spaces -- a platform for enterprises and individuals that enhances distributed collaboration via Linked Data driven virtualization of data across its native and/or 3rd party content manager for: Blogs, Wikis, Shared Bookmarks, Discussion Forums, Social Networks etc
• OpenLink Virtuoso -- a secure and high-performance native hybrid data server (Relational, RDF-Graph, Document models) that includes in-built Linked Data transformation middleware (aka. Sponger).

Related

• Hypertext Transfer Protocol 1.1 RFC
• Open Data Protocol Glossary
• Simple Explanation of RDF and Linked Data Dynamics
• Collection of post from the past about Linked Data
• Are We There Yet Re. Web++? -- includes link to podcast conversation with Jon Udell
• Web of Linked Data Pivoting Demo from TED -- by Microsoft's Gary Flake
• Microsoft Pivot atop Virtuoso Quad Store's Faceted Browser Engine-- My Demonstration of EAV model transcending data representation variations (i.e., RDF's EAV data model data served up in Microsoft CXML data representation format).

Anyway, Socialtext and Mike 2.0 (they aren't identical and juxtaposition isn't seeking to imply this) provide nice demonstrations of socially enhanced collaboration for individuals and/or enterprises is all about:

1. Identifying Yourself
2. Identifying Others (key contributors, peers, collaborators)
3. Serendipitous Discovery of key contributors, peers, and collaborators
4. Serendipitous Discovery by key contributors, peers, and collaborators
5. Develop and sustain relationships via socially enhanced professional network hybrid
6. Utilize your new "trusted network" (which you've personally indexed) when seeking help or propagating a meme.

As is typically the case in this emerging realm, the critical issue of discrete "identifiers" (record keys in sense) for data items, data containers, and data creators (individuals and groups) is overlooked albeit unintentionally.

How HTTP based Linked Data Addresses the Identifier Issue

Rather than using platform constrained identifiers such as:

• email address (a "mailto" scheme identifier),
• a dbms user account,
• application specific account, or
• OpenID.

It enables you to leverage the platform independence of HTTP scheme Identifiers (Generic URIs) such that Identifiers for:

1. You,
2. Your Peers,
3. Your Groups, and
4. Your Activity Generated Data,

simply become conduits into a mesh of HTTP -- referencable and accessible -- Linked Data Objects endowed with High SDQ (Serendipitious Discovery Quotient). For example my Personal WebID is all anyone needs to know if they want to explore:

1. My Profile (which includes references to data objects associated with my interests, social-network, calendar, bookmarks etc.)
2. Data generated by my activities across various data spaces (via data objects associated with my online accounts e.g. Del.icio.us, Twitter, Last.FM)
3. Linked Data Meshups via URIBurner (or any other Virtuoso instance) that provide an extend view of my profile

How FOAF+SSL adds Socially aware Security

Even when you reach a point of equilibrium where: your daily activities trigger orchestratestration of CRUD (Create, Read, Update, Delete) operations against Linked Data Objects within your socially enhanced collaboration network, you still have to deal with the thorny issues of security, that includes the following:

1. Single Sign On,
2. Authentication, and
3. Data Access Policies.

FOAF+SSL, an application of HTTP based Linked Data, enables you to enhance your Personal HTTP scheme based Identifer (or WebID) via the following steps (peformed by a FOAF+SSL compliant platform):

1. Imprint WebID within a self-signed x.509 based public key (certificate) associated with your private key (generated by FOAF+SSL platform or manually via OpenSSL)
2. Store public key components (modulous and exponent) into your FOAF based profile document which references your Personal HTTP Identifier as its primary topic
3. Leverage HTTP URL component of WebID for making public key components (modulous and exponent) available for x.509 certificate based authentication challenges posed by systems secured by FOAF+SSL (directly) or OpenID (indirectly via FOAF+SSL to OpenID proxy services).

Contrary to conventional experiences with all things PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) related, FOAF+SSL compliant platforms typically handle the PKI issues as part of the protocol implementation; thereby protecting you from any administrative tedium without compromising security.

Conclusions

Understanding how new technology innovations address long standing problems, or understanding how new solutions inadvertently fail to address old problems, provides time tested mechanisms for product selection and value proposition comprehension that ultimately save scarce resources such as time and money.

If you want to understand real world problem solution #1 with regards to HTTP based Linked Data look no further than the issues of secure, socially aware, and platform independent identifiers for data objects, that build bridges across erstwhile data silos.

If you want to cost-effectively experience what I've outlined in this post, take a look at OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS) which is a distributed collaboration engine (enterprise of individual) built around the Virtuoso database engines. It simply enhances existing collaboration tools via the following capabilities:

Addition of Social Dimensions via HTTP based Data Object Identifiers for all Data Items (if missing)

1. Ability to integrate across a myriad of Data Source Types rather than a select few across RDBM Engines, LDAP, Web Services, and various HTTP accessible Resources (Hypermedia or Non Hypermedia content types)
2. Addition of FOAF+SSL based authentication
3. Addition of FOAF+SSL based Access Control Lists (ACLs) for policy based data access.

Related:

• Get Yourself A WebID in 5 Minutes or Less via OpenLink Data Spaces (an application layer built atop Virtuoso)
• How To Share Resources Securely Using FOAF+SSL
• FOAF+SSL & WebID Demonstration
• OpenLink Data Spaces & Data Portability.

Sticking with the TechCrunch layout, here is why all roads simply lead to Linked Data come 2010 and beyond:

1. The Tablet: a new form factor addition re. Internet and Web application hosts which is just another way of saying: Linked Data will be accessible from Tablet applications.
2. Geo: GPS chips are now standard features of mobile phones, so geolocation is increasingly becoming a necessary feature for any killer app. Thus, GeoSpatial Linked Data and GeopSpatial Queries are going to be a critical success factor for any endeavor that seeks to engage mobile applications developers and ultimately their end-users. Basiacally, you want to be able to perform Esoteric Search from these devices of the form: Find Vendors of a Camcorder (e.g., with a Zoom Factor: Weight Ratio of X) within a 2km Radius of my current location. Or how many items from my WishList are available from a Vendor within a 2km radius of my current location. Conversely, provide Vendors with the ability to spot potential Customers within a 2km of a given "clicks & mortar" location (e.g. BestBuy store).
3. Realtime Search: Rich Structured Profiles that leverage standards such as FOAF and FOAF+SSL will enable Highly Personalized Realtime Search (HPRS) without compromisng privacy. Tecnically, this is about WebIDs securely bound to X.509 Certificates, providing access to verifiable and highly navigable Personal Profile Data Spaces that also double as personal search index entry points.
4. Chrome OS: Just another operating system for exploiting the burgeoning Web of Linked Data
5. HTML5: Courtesy of RDFa, just another mechanism for exposing Linked Data by making HTML+RDFa a bona fide markup for metadata (i.e., format for describing real world objects via their attribute-value graphs)
6. Mobile Video: Simplifies the production and sharing of Video annotations (comments, reviews etc.) en route to creating rich Linked Discourse Data Spaces.
7. Augmented Reality: Ditto
8. Mobile Transactions: As per points 1&2 above, Vendor Discovery and Transaction Conusmation will increasingly be driven by high SDQ applications. The "Funnel Effect" (more choices based on individual preferences) will be a critical success factor for any one operating in the Mobile Transaction realm. Note, without Linked Data you cannot deliver scalable solutions that handle the combined requirements of: SDQ, "Funnel Effect", and Mobile Device form factor, will simply maginify the importance of Web accessible Linked Data.
9. Android: An additional platform for items 1-8; basically, 2010 isn't going to be an iPhone only zone. Personally, this reminds me of a battle from the past i.e., Microsoft vs Apple, re. desktop computing dominance. Google has studied history very well :-)
10. Social CRM: this is simply about applying points 1-9 alongide the construction of Linked Data from eCRM Data Spaces.

As I've stated in the past (across a variety of mediums), you cannot build applications that have long term value without addressing the following issues:

1. Data Item or Object Identity
2. Data Structure -- Data Models
3. Data Representation -- Data Model Entity & Relationships Representation mechanism (as delivered by metadata oriented markup)
4. Data Storage -- Database Management Systems
5. Data Access -- Data Access Protocols
6. Data Presentation -- How you present Views and Reports from Structured Data Sources
7. Data Security -- Data Access Policies

The items above basically showcase the very essence of the HTTP URI abstraction that drives HTTP based Linked Data; which is also the basic payload unit that underlies REST.

Conclusion

I simply hope that the next decade marks a period of broad appreciation and comprehension of Data Access, Integration, and Management issues on the parts of: application developers, integrators, analysts, end-users, and decision makers. Remember, without structured Data we cannot produce or share Information, and without Information, we cannot produce of share Knowledge.

Related

• HTTP URI Abstraction and Linked Data
• First Law of Data Quality
• Who's Data Is It?
• Serendipitous Discovery Quotient (SDQ)
• SDQ: The Future of SEO or an Abstract Concept?
• SPARQL & GeoSpatial Indexing (implications of SPARQL-GEO)
• Mastering Your Own Search Index
• Solving the Paradox of Choice.

Background

A few months ago, Aldo Bucchi posted a message to the LOD mailing list seeking a discussion space for more business and marketing oriented topic, in relation to Linked Data. At the time, my assumption was that the existing LOD mailing list served that purpose absolutely fine, but in due course I came to realize that Aldo's request had a much lager foundation than I initially suspected.

Historic Oversight

Linked Data, like its umbrella Semantic Web Project, has suffered from an inadvertent oversight on the parts of many of its enthusiasts (myself included): 100% of the discussion spaces are created by, geared towards, or dominated by researchers (from Academia primarily) and/or developers. Thus, at the very least, we've been operating in an echo chamber that only feed the existing void between the core community and those who are more interested in discussing business and marketing related topics.

The new discussion space seeks to cover the following:

1. Brainstorming Value Proposition Articulation
2. War Story Exchanges
3. Case Studies and Use-cases
4. Market Research & Positioning (for instance Linked Data is killer technology that redefines Data Integration, but none of the major research firms currently make that connection)
.

How Do I Join The Conversation? Simply sign up on the Google hosted BOLD mailing list, introduce yourself (ideally), and then start conversing! :-)

Background

A few months ago, Aldo Bucchi posted a message to the LOD mailing list seeking a discussion space for more business and marketing oriented topic, in relation to Linked Data. At the time, my assumption was that the existing LOD mailing list served that purpose absolutely fine, but in due course I came to realize that Aldo's request had a much lager foundation than I initially suspected.

Historic Oversight

Linked Data, like its umbrella Semantic Web Project, has suffered from an inadvertent oversight on the parts of many of its enthusiasts (myself included): 100% of the discussion spaces are created by, geared towards, or dominated by researchers (from Academia primarily) and/or developers. Thus, at the very least, we've been operating in an echo chamber that only feed the existing void between the core community and those who are more interested in discussing business and marketing related topics.

The new discussion space seeks to cover the following:

1. Brainstorming Value Proposition Articulation
2. War Story Exchanges
3. Case Studies and Use-cases
4. Market Research & Positioning (for instance Linked Data is killer technology that redefines Data Integration, but none of the major research firms currently make that connection)
.

How Do I Join The Conversation? Simply sign up on the Google hosted BOLD mailing list, introduce yourself (ideally), and then start conversing! :-)

Note to Web Programmers: Linked Data is about Data (Wine) and not about Code (Fish). Thus, it isn't a "programmer only zone", far from it. More than anything else, its inherently inclusive and spreads its participation net widely across: Data Architects, Data Integrators, Power Users, Knowledge Workers, Information Workers, Data Analysts, etc.. Basically, everyone that can "click on a link" is invited to this particular party; remember, it is about "Linked Data" not "Linked Code", after all. :-)

Problematic Value Pyramid Layering

Here is an example of a Linked Data value pyramid that I am stumbling across --with some frequency-- these days (note: 1 being the pyramid apex):

1. SPARQL Queries
2. RDF Data Stores
3. RDF Data Sets
4. HTTP scheme URIs

Basically, Linked Data deployment (assigning de-referencable HTTP URIs to DBMS records, their attributes, and attribute values [optionally] ) is occurring last. Even worse, this happens in the context of Linked Open Data oriented endeavors, resulting in nothing but confusion or inadvertent perpetuation of the overarching pragmatically challenged "Semantic Web" stereotype.

As you can imagine, hitting SPARQL as your introduction to Linked Data is akin to hitting SQL as your introduction to Relational Database Technology, neither is an elevator-style value prop. relay mechanism.

In the relational realm, killer demos always started with desktop productivity tools (spreadsheets, report-writers, SQL QBE tools etc.) accessing, relational data sources en route to unveiling the "Productivity" and "Agility" value prop. that such binding delivered i.e., the desktop application (clients) and the databases (servers) are distinct, but operating in a mutually beneficial manner to all, courtesy of a data access standards such as ODBC (Open Database Connectivity).

In the Linked Data realm, learning to embrace and extend best practices from the relational dbms realm remains a challenge, a lot of this has to do with hangovers from a misguided perception that RDF databases will somehow completely replace RDBMS engines, rather than compliment them. Thus, you have a counter productive variant of NIH (Not Invented Here) in play, taking us to the dreaded realm of: Break the Pot and You Own It (exemplified by the 11+ year Semantic Web Project comprehension and appreciation odyssey).

From my vantage point, here is how I believe the Linked Data value pyramid should be layered, especially when communicating the essential value prop.:

1. HTTP URLs -- LINKs to documents (Reports) that users already appreciate, across the public Web and/or Intranets
2. HTTP URIs -- typically not visually distinguishable from the URLs, so use the Data exposed by de-referencing a URL to show how each Data Item (Entity or Object) is uniquely identified by a Generic HTTP URI, and how clicking on the said URIs leads to more structured metadata bearing documents available in a variety of data representation formats, thereby enabling flexible data presentation (e.g., smarter HTML pages)
3. SPARQL -- when a user appreciates the data representation and presentation dexterity of a Generic HTTP URI, they will be more inclined to drill down an additional layer to unravel how HTTP URIs mechanically deliver such flexibility
4. RDF Data Stores -- at this stage the user is now interested data sources behind the Generic HTTP URIs, courtesy of natural desire to tweak the data presented in the report; thus, you now have an engaged user ready to absorb the "How Generic HTTP URIs Pull This Off" message
5. RDF Data Sets -- while attempting to make or tweak HTTP URIs, users become curious about the actual data loaded into the RDF Data Store, which is where data sets used to create powerful Lookup Data Spaces (e.g., DBpedia) come into play such as those from the LOD constellation as exemplified by DBpedia (extractions from Wikipedia).

Related

• Exploring the Linked Data Value Proposition
• Simple Explanation of Linked Data & RDF Dynamics
• What is the Linked Data Meme About?
• Linked Data & Data Item Identifiers (Identity)

1. inaccurate and incomplete definition of the Project's What, Why, Who, Where, When, and How
2. inaccurate reflection of project essence, by skewing focus towards data extraction and data set dump production, which is at best a quarter of the project.

Here are some insights on DBpedia, from the perspective of someone intimately involved with the other three-quarters of the project.

What is DBpedia?

A live Web accessible RDF model database (Quad Store) derived from Wikipedia content snapshots, taken periodically. The RDF database underlies a Linked Data Space comprised of: HTML (and most recently HTML+RDFa) based data browser pages and a SPARQL endpoint.

Note: DBpedia 3.4 now exists in snapshot (warehouse) and Live Editions (currently being hot-staged). This post is about the snapshot (warehouse) edition, I'll drop a different post about the DBpedia Live Edition where a new Delta-Engine covers both extraction and database record replacement, in realtime.

When was it Created?

As an idea under the moniker "DBpedia" it was conceptualized in late 2006 by researchers at University of Leipzig (lead by Soren Auer) and Freie University, Berlin (lead by Chris Bizer). The first public instance of DBpedia (as described above) was released in February 2007. The official DBpedia coming out party occurred at WWW2007, Banff, during the inaugural Linked Data gathering, where it showcased the virtues and immense potential of TimBL's Linked Data meme.

Who's Behind It?

OpenLink Software (developers of OpenLink Virtuoso and providers of Web Hosting infrastructure), University of Leipzig, and Freie Univerity, Berlin. In addition, there is a burgeoning community of collaborators and contributors responsible DBpedia based applications, cross-linked data sets, ontologies (OpenCyc, SUMO, UMBEL, and YAGO) and other utilities. Finally, DBpedia wouldn't be possible without the global content contribution and curation efforts of Wikipedians, a point typically overlooked (albeit inadvertently).

How is it Constructed?

The steps are as follows:

1. RDF data set dump preparation via Wikipedia content extraction and transformation to RDF model data, using the N3 data representation format - Java and PHP extraction code produced and maintained by the teams at Leipzig and Berlin
2. Deployment of Linked Data that enables Data browsing and exploration using any HTTP aware user agent (e.g. basic Web Browsers) - handled by OpenLink Virtuoso (handled by Berlin via the Pubby Linked Data Server during the early months of the DBpedia project)
3. SPARQL compliant Quad Store, enabling direct access to database records via SPARQL (Query language, REST or SOAP Web Service, plus a variety of query results serialization formats) - OpenLink Virtuoso since first public release of DBpedia

In a nutshell, there are four distinct and vital components to DBpedia. Thus, DBpedia doesn't exist if all the project offered was a collection of RDF data dumps. Likewise, it doesn't exist if you have a SPARQL compliant Quad Store without loaded data sets, and of course it doesn't exist if you have a fully loaded SPARQL compliant Quad Store is up to the cocktail of challenges presented by live Web accessibility.

Why is it Important?

It remains a live exemplar for any individual or organization seeking to publishing or exploit HTTP based Linked Data on the World Wide Web. Its existence continues to stimulate growth in both density and quality of the burgeoning Web of Linked Data.

How Do I Use it?

In the most basic sense, simply browse the HTML pages en route to discovery erstwhile relationships that exist across named entities and subject matter concepts / headings. Beyond that, simply look at DBpedia as a master lookup table in a Web hosted distributed database setup; enabling you to mesh your local domain specific details with DBpedia records via structured relations (triples or 3-tuples records) comprised of HTTP URIs from both realms e.g., owl:sameAs relations.

What Can I Use it For?

Expanding on the Master-Details point above, you can use its rich URI corpus to alleviate tedium associated with activities such as:

1. List maintenance - e.g., Countries, States, Companies, Units of Measurement, Subject Headings etc.
2. Tagging - as a compliment to existing practices
3. Analytical Research - you're only a LINK (URI) away from erstwhile difficult to attain research data spread across a broad range of topics
4. Closed Vocabulary Construction - rather than commence the futile quest of building your own closed vocabulary, simply leverage Wikipedia's human curated vocabulary as our common base.

Related

• Pre-loaded and Pre-configured instances of DBpedia 3.4 - via publicly shared Amazon Elastic Block Storage Snapshots
• Virtuoso & DBpedia Tunning Guide
• What's In a Name & The Linked Data Police.

Note to Web Programmers: Linked Data is about Data (Wine) and not about Code (Fish). Thus, it isn't a "programmer only zone", far from it. More than anything else, its inherently inclusive and spreads its participation net widely across: Data Architects, Data Integrators, Power Users, Knowledge Workers, Information Workers, Data Analysts, etc.. Basically, everyone that can "click on a link" is invited to this particular party; remember, it is about "Linked Data" not "Linked Code", after all. :-)

Problematic Value Pyramid Layering

Here is an example of a Linked Data value pyramid that I am stumbling across --with some frequency-- these days (note: 1 being the pyramid apex):

1. SPARQL Queries
2. RDF Data Stores
3. RDF Data Sets
4. HTTP scheme URIs

Basically, Linked Data deployment (assigning de-referencable HTTP URIs to DBMS records, their attributes, and attribute values [optionally] ) is occurring last. Even worse, this happens in the context of Linked Open Data oriented endeavors, resulting in nothing but confusion or inadvertent perpetuation of the overarching pragmatically challenged "Semantic Web" stereotype.

As you can imagine, hitting SPARQL as your introduction to Linked Data is akin to hitting SQL as your introduction to Relational Database Technology, neither is an elevator-style value prop. relay mechanism.

In the relational realm, killer demos always started with desktop productivity tools (spreadsheets, report-writers, SQL QBE tools etc.) accessing, relational data sources en route to unveiling the "Productivity" and "Agility" value prop. that such binding delivered i.e., the desktop application (clients) and the databases (servers) are distinct, but operating in a mutually beneficial manner to all, courtesy of a data access standards such as ODBC (Open Database Connectivity).

In the Linked Data realm, learning to embrace and extend best practices from the relational dbms realm remains a challenge, a lot of this has to do with hangovers from a misguided perception that RDF databases will somehow completely replace RDBMS engines, rather than compliment them. Thus, you have a counter productive variant of NIH (Not Invented Here) in play, taking us to the dreaded realm of: Break the Pot and You Own It (exemplified by the 11+ year Semantic Web Project comprehension and appreciation odyssey).

From my vantage point, here is how I believe the Linked Data value pyramid should be layered, especially when communicating the essential value prop.:

1. HTTP URLs -- LINKs to documents (Reports) that users already appreciate, across the public Web and/or Intranets
2. HTTP URIs -- typically not visually distinguishable from the URLs, so use the Data exposed by de-referencing a URL to show how each Data Item (Entity or Object) is uniquely identified by a Generic HTTP URI, and how clicking on the said URIs leads to more structured metadata bearing documents available in a variety of data representation formats, thereby enabling flexible data presentation (e.g., smarter HTML pages)
3. SPARQL -- when a user appreciates the data representation and presentation dexterity of a Generic HTTP URI, they will be more inclined to drill down an additional layer to unravel how HTTP URIs mechanically deliver such flexibility
4. RDF Data Stores -- at this stage the user is now interested data sources behind the Generic HTTP URIs, courtesy of natural desire to tweak the data presented in the report; thus, you now have an engaged user ready to absorb the "How Generic HTTP URIs Pull This Off" message
5. RDF Data Sets -- while attempting to make or tweak HTTP URIs, users become curious about the actual data loaded into the RDF Data Store, which is where data sets used to create powerful Lookup Data Spaces (e.g., DBpedia) come into play such as those from the LOD constellation as exemplified by DBpedia (extractions from Wikipedia).

Related

• Exploring the Linked Data Value Proposition
• Simple Explanation of Linked Data & RDF Dynamics
• What is the Linked Data Meme About?
• Linked Data & Data Item Identifiers (Identity)

1. inaccurate and incomplete definition of the Project's What, Why, Who, Where, When, and How
2. inaccurate reflection of project essence, by skewing focus towards data extraction and data set dump production, which is at best a quarter of the project.

Here are some insights on DBpedia, from the perspective of someone intimately involved with the other three-quarters of the project.

What is DBpedia?

A live Web accessible RDF model database (Quad Store) derived from Wikipedia content snapshots, taken periodically. The RDF database underlies a Linked Data Space comprised of: HTML (and most recently HTML+RDFa) based data browser pages and a SPARQL endpoint.

Note: DBpedia 3.4 now exists in snapshot (warehouse) and Live Editions (currently being hot-staged). This post is about the snapshot (warehouse) edition, I'll drop a different post about the DBpedia Live Edition where a new Delta-Engine covers both extraction and database record replacement, in realtime.

When was it Created?

As an idea under the moniker "DBpedia" it was conceptualized in late 2006 by researchers at University of Leipzig (lead by Soren Auer) and Freie University, Berlin (lead by Chris Bizer). The first public instance of DBpedia (as described above) was released in February 2007. The official DBpedia coming out party occurred at WWW2007, Banff, during the inaugural Linked Data gathering, where it showcased the virtues and immense potential of TimBL's Linked Data meme.

Who's Behind It?

OpenLink Software (developers of OpenLink Virtuoso and providers of Web Hosting infrastructure), University of Leipzig, and Freie Univerity, Berlin. In addition, there is a burgeoning community of collaborators and contributors responsible DBpedia based applications, cross-linked data sets, ontologies (OpenCyc, SUMO, UMBEL, and YAGO) and other utilities. Finally, DBpedia wouldn't be possible without the global content contribution and curation efforts of Wikipedians, a point typically overlooked (albeit inadvertently).

How is it Constructed?

The steps are as follows:

1. RDF data set dump preparation via Wikipedia content extraction and transformation to RDF model data, using the N3 data representation format - Java and PHP extraction code produced and maintained by the teams at Leipzig and Berlin
2. Deployment of Linked Data that enables Data browsing and exploration using any HTTP aware user agent (e.g. basic Web Browsers) - handled by OpenLink Virtuoso (handled by Berlin via the Pubby Linked Data Server during the early months of the DBpedia project)
3. SPARQL compliant Quad Store, enabling direct access to database records via SPARQL (Query language, REST or SOAP Web Service, plus a variety of query results serialization formats) - OpenLink Virtuoso since first public release of DBpedia

In a nutshell, there are four distinct and vital components to DBpedia. Thus, DBpedia doesn't exist if all the project offered was a collection of RDF data dumps. Likewise, it doesn't exist without a fully populated SPARQL compliant Quad Store. Last but not least, it doesn't exist if you have a fully loaded SPARQL compliant Quad Store isn't up to the cocktail of challenges (query load and complexity) presented by live Web database accessibility.

Why is it Important?

It remains a live exemplar for any individual or organization seeking to publishing or exploit HTTP based Linked Data on the World Wide Web. Its existence continues to stimulate growth in both density and quality of the burgeoning Web of Linked Data.

How Do I Use it?

In the most basic sense, simply browse the HTML based resource decriptor pages en route to discovering erstwhile undiscovered relationships that exist across named entities and subject matter concepts / headings. Beyond that, simply look at DBpedia as a master lookup table in a Web hosted distributed database setup; enabling you to mesh your local domain specific details with DBpedia records via structured relations (triples or 3-tuples records), comprised of HTTP URIs from both realms e.g., via owl:sameAs relations.

What Can I Use it For?

Expanding on the Master-Details point above, you can use its rich URI corpus to alleviate tedium associated with activities such as:

1. List maintenance - e.g., Countries, States, Companies, Units of Measurement, Subject Headings etc.
2. Tagging - as a compliment to existing practices
3. Analytical Research - you're only a LINK (URI) away from erstwhile difficult to attain research data spread across a broad range of topics
4. Closed Vocabulary Construction - rather than commence the futile quest of building your own closed vocabulary, simply leverage Wikipedia's human curated vocabulary as our common base.

Related

• Pre-loaded and Pre-configured instances of DBpedia 3.4 - via publicly shared Amazon Elastic Block Storage Snapshots
• Virtuoso & DBpedia Tunning Guide
• What's In a Name & The Linked Data Police.

Your Life, Profession, Web, and Internet do not need to become mutually exclusive due to "information overload".

Solution:

A platform or service that delivers a point of online presence that embodies the fundamental separation of: Identity, Data Access, Data Representation, Data Presentation, by adhering to Web and Internet protocols.

How:

Typical post installation (Local or Cloud) task sequence:

1. Identify myself (happens automatically by way of registration)
2. If in an LDAP environment, import accounts or associate system with LDAP for account lookup and authentication
3. Identify Online Accounts (by fleshing out profile) which also connects system to online accounts and their data
4. Use Profile for granular description (Biography, Interests, WishList, OfferList, etc.)
5. Optionally upstream or downstream data to and from my online accounts
6. Create content Tagging Rules
7. Create rules for associating Tags with formal URIs
8. Create automatic Hyperlinking Rules for reuse when new content is created (e.g. Blog posts)
9. Exploit Data Portability virtues of RSS, Atom, OPML, RDFa, RDF/XML, and other formats for imports and exports
10. Automatically tag imported content
11. Use function-specific helper application UIs for domain specific data generation e.g. AddressBook (optionally use vCard import), Calendar (optionally use iCalendar import), Email, File Storage (use WebDAV mount with copy and paste or HTTP GET), Feed Subscriptions (optionally import RSS/Atom/OPML feeds), Bookmarking (optionally import bookmark.html or XBEL) etc..
12. Optionally enable "Conversation" feature (today: Social Media feature) across the relevant application domains (manage conversations under covers using NNTP, the standard for this functionality realm)
13. Generate HTTP based Entity IDs (URIs) for every piece of data in this burgeoning data space
14. Use REST based APIs to perform CRUD tasks against my data (local and remote) (SPARQL, GData, Ubiquity Commands, Atom Publishing)
15. Use OpenID, OAuth, FOAF+SSL, FOAF+SSL+OpenID for accessing data elsewhere
16. Use OpenID, OAuth, FOAF+SSL, FOAF+SSL+OpenID for Controlling access to my data (Self Signed Certificate Generation, Browser Import of said Certificate & associated Private Key, plus persistence of Certificate to FOAF based profile data space in "one click")
17. Have a simple UI for Entity-Attribute-Value or Subject-Predicate-Object arbitrary data annotations and creation since you can't pre model an "Open World" where the only constant is data flow
18. Have my Personal URI (Web ID) as the single entry point for controlled access to my HTTP accessible data space

I've just outlined a snippet of the capabilities of the OpenLink Data Spaces platform. A platform built using OpenLink Virtuoso, architected to deliver: open, platform independent, multi-model, data access and data management across heterogeneous data sources.

All you need to remember is your URI when seeking to interact with your data space.

Related

1. Get Yourself a URI (Web ID) in 5 Minutes or Less!
2. Various posts over the years about Data Spaces
3. Future of Desktop Post
4. Simplify My Life Post by Bengee Nowack

At the current time we have loaded 100% of all the very large data sets from the LOD Cloud. As result, we can start the process of exposing Linked Data virtues in a manner that's palatable to users, developers, and database professionals across the Web 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 spectrums.

What does this mean?

You can use the "Search & Find" or"URI Lookup" or SPARQL endpoint associated with the LOD cloud hosting instance to perform the following tasks:

1. Find entities associated with full text search patterns -- Google Style, but with Entity & Text proximity Rank instead of Page Rank, since we are dealing with Entities rather than documents about entities
2. Find and Lookup entities by Identifier (URI) -- which is helpful when locating URIs to use for identify entities in your own linked data spaces on the Web
3. View entity descriptions via a variety of representation formats (HTML, RDFa, RDF/XML, N3, Turtle etc.)
4. Determine uses of entity identifiers across the LOD cloud -- which helps you select preferred URIs based on usage statistics.

What does it offer Web 1.0 and 2.0 developers?

If you don't want to use the SPARQL based Web Service, or other Linked Data Web oriented APIs for interacting with the LOD cloud programmatically, you can simply use the powerful REST style Web Service that provides URL parameters for performing full text oriented "Search", entity oriented "Find" queries, and faceted navigation over the huge data corpus with results data returned in JSON and XML formats.

Next Steps:

Amazon have agreed to add all the LOD Cloud data sets to their existing public data sets collective. Thus, the data sets we are loading will be available in "raw data" (RDF) format on the public data sets page via Named Elastic Block Storage (EBS) Snapshots); meaning, you can make an EC2 AMI (e.g. a Linux, Windows, Solaris) and install an RDF quad or triple store of choice into your AMI, then simply load data from the LOD cloud based on your needs.

In addition to the above, we are also going to offer a Virtuoso 6.0 Cluster Edition based LOD Cloud AMI (as we've already done with DBpedia, MusicBrainz, NeuroCommons, and Bio2Rdf) that will enable you to simply instantiate a personal and service specific edition of Virtuoso with all the LOD data in place and fully tuned for performance and scalability; basically, you will simply press "Instantiate AMI" and a LOD cloud data space, in true Linked Data from, will be at your disposal within minutes (i.e. the time it takes the DB to start).

Work on the migration of the LOD data to EC2 starts this week. Thus, if you are interested in contributing an RDF based data set to the LOD cloud now is the time to get your archive links in place on the (see: ESW Wiki page for LOD Data Sets).

Jason:

Scoble is sensing what comes next, but in my opinion, describes it using an old obtrusive advertising model anecdote.

I've penned a post or two about the "Magic of You" which is all about the new Web power broker (Entity: "You").

Personally, I've long envisaged a complete overhaul of advertising where obtrusive advertising simply withers away; ultimately replaced by an unobtrusive model that is driven by individualized relevance and high doses of serendipity. Basically, this is ultimately about "taking the Ad out of item placement in Web pages".

The fundamental ingredients of an unobtrusive advertising landscape would include the following Human facts:

1. We are social beings and need stuff from time to time
2. We know what we need and would like to "Find stuff" when we are in "I Need Stuff" mode.

Ideally, we would like to be able to simply state the following, via a Web accessible profile:

1. Here are my "Wants" or "Needs" (my Wish-List)
2. Here are the products and services that I "Offer" (my Offer-List).

Now put the above into the context of an evolving Web where data items are becoming more visible by the second, courtesy of the "Linked Data" meme. Thus, things that weren't discernable via the Web: "People", "Places", "Music", "Books", "Products", etc., become much easier to identify and describe.

Assuming the comments above hold true re. the Web's evolution into a collection of Linked Data Spaces, and the following occur:

1. Structured profile pages become the basic units of Web presence
2. Wish-Lists and Offer-Lists are exposed by profile pages

Wish-Lists and Offer-Lists will gradually start bonding with increasing degrees of serendipity courtesy of exponential growth in Linked Data Web density.

So based on what I've stated so far, Scoble would simply browse the Web or visit his profile page, and in either scenario enjoy a "minority report" style of experience albeit all under his control (since he is the one driving his Web user agent).

What I describe above simply comes down to "Wish-lists" and associated recommendations becoming the norm outside the confines of Amazon's data space on the Web. Serendipitous discovery, intelligent lookups, and linkages are going to be the fundamental essence of Linked Data Web oriented applications, services, agents.

Beyond Scoble, it's also important to note that access to data will be controlled by entity "You". Your data space on the Web will be something you will controll access to in a myriad of ways, and it will include the option to provide licensed access to commercial entities on your terms. Naturally, you will also determine the currency that facilitates the value exchange :-)

Related

• The Numerati & The Magic of You!
• Serendipitous Discovery Quotient (SDQ) Explained
• Minority Report Clip

Naturally, I am not expecting everyone to agree with me. I am simply making my contribution to what will remain facinating discourse for a long time to come :-)

Related

• Web 3.0 The Best Official Definition Imaginable -- Nova Spivack's

Robin:

Web 3.0 is fundamentally about the World Wid Web becoming a structured database equipped with a formal data model (RDF which is a moniker for Entity-Attribute-Value with Classes & Relationships based Graph Model), query language, and a protocol for handling divrerse data representational requirements via negotiation

Web 3.0 is about a Web that facilitates serendipitous discovery of relevant things; thereby making serendipitous discovery quotient (SDQ), rather than search engine optimization (SEO), the critical success factor that drives how resources get published on the Web.

Personally, I believe we are on the cusp of a major industry inflection re. how we interact with data hosted in computing spaces. In a nutshell, the conceptual model interaction based on real-world entities such as people, places, and other things (including abstract subject matter) will usurp traditional logical model interaction based on rows and columns of typed and/or untyped literal values exemplified by relational data access and management systems.

Labels such as "Web 3.0", "Linked Data", and "Semantic Web", are simply about the aforementioned model transition playing out on the World Wide Web and across private Linked Data Webs such as Intranets & Extranets, as exemplified emergence of the "Master Data Management" label/buzzword.

What's the critical infrastructure supporting Web 3.0?

As was the case with Web Services re. Web 2.0, there is a critical piece of infrastructure driving the evolution in question, and in this case it comes down to the evolution of Hyperlinking.

We now have a new and complimentary variant of Hyperlinking commonly referred to as "Hyperdata" that now sits alongside "Hypertext". Hyperdata when used in conjunction with HTTP based URIs as Data Source Names (or Identifiers), delivers a potent and granular data access mechanism scoped down to the datum (object or record) level; which is much different from the document (record or entity container) level linkage that Hypertext accords.

In addition, the incorporation of HTTP into this new and enhanced granular Data Source Naming mechanism also addresses past challenges relating to separation of data, data representation, and data transmission protocols -- remember XDR woes familiar to all sockets level programmers -- courtesy of in-built content negotiation. Hence, via a simple HTTP GET --against a Data Source Name exposed by a Hyperdata link -- I can negotiate (from client or server sides) the exact representation of the description (entity-attribute-value graph) of an Entity / Data Object / Resource, dispatched by a data server.

For example, this is how a description of entity "Me" ends up being available in (X)HTML or RDF document representations (as you will observe when you click on that link to my Personal URI).

The foundation of what I describe above comes from:

1. Entity-Attribute-Value & Class Relationship Data Model (originating from LISP era with detours via the Object Database era. into the Triples approach in RDF)
2. Use of HTTP based Identifiers in the Entity ID construction process
3. SPARQL query language for the Data Model.

Some live examples from DBpedia:

• http://dbpedia.org/resource/Linked_Data
• http://dbpedia.org/resource/Hyperdata
• http://dbpedia.org/resource/Entity-attribute-value_model
• http://dbpedia.org/resource/Benjamin_Franklin

Related

• The End of RDBMS Primacy is Nigh
• Linking Open Data Community

Today, I revisited the same article -- and to my shock and horror -- my comments do not exist (note: the site did accept my comments yesterday!). Even more frustrating for me, I now have to expend time I don't have re-writing my comments due to the depth and danger of the inaccuracies in this post re. RDF in general.

Important Note to ebiz and David:

Please look into what happened to my comments. It's too early for me to conclude that subjective censorship is a play on the Web -- which isn't a hard copy journalistic format style of platform where editors get away with such shenanigans. The Web is a sticky database, and outer joining is well and truly functional (meaning: exclusion and omission ultimately come back to bite via full outer join query results against the Web DB).

By the way, if you publish the comments I made to the post (yesterday), I will add a note to this post, accordingly.

Yes! David just confirmed to me via Twitter that this is yet another comment system related issue and absolutely no intent to censor etc. His words Twervatim :-)

For sake of clarity, I've itemized the inaccuracies and applied my correction comments (inline) accordingly:

Inaccuracy #1:

Resource Description Framework (RDF), a part of the XML story, provides interoperability between applications that exchange information.

Correction #1:

RDF and XML are not inextricably linked in any way. RDF is part Data Model (EAV/CR style Graph) with associated markup and data serialization formats that include: N3, Turtle, TriX, RDF/XML etc.

Inaccuracy #2:

RDF uses XML to define a foundation for processing metadata and to provide a standard metadata infrastructure for both the Web and the enterprise.

Correction #2:

RDF/XML is an XML based markup and data serialization format. As a markup language it can be used for creating RDF model records/statements (using Subject, Predicate, Object or Entity, Attribute, Value). As a serialization format, it provides a mechanism for marshaling RDF data across data managers and data consumers.

Inaccuracy #3:

The difference between the two is that XML is used to transport data using a common format, while RDF is layered on top of XML defining a broad category of data.

Correction #3:

See earlier corrections above.

Inaccuracy #4:

When the XML data is declared to be of the RDF format, applications are then able to understand the data without understanding who sent it.

Correction #4:

You do not declare data to be of RDF format. RDF isn't a format it is a data model (as stated above). You can "up lift" or map data from XML to RDF (hierarchical to graph model mapping). Likewise you can "down shift" or map data from RDF to XML (example: SPARQL SELECT query patterns "down shift" to SPARQL Results XML, which isn't RDF/XML, while keeping access to graphs via URIs or Entity Identifiers that reside within the serialization).

Inaccuracy #5:

RDF extends the XML model and syntax to be specified for describing either resources or a collection of information. (XML points to a resource in order to scope and uniquely identify a set of properties known as the schema.).

Correction #5:

See earlier comments.

The single accurate paragraph in this ebiz article lies right at the end and it states the following:

"I've always thought RDF has been underutilized for data integration, and it's really an old standard. Now that we're focused on both understanding and integrating data, perhaps RDF should make a comeback."

Related:

• Semantic Web FAQ fragment re. RDF and XML
• Various posts re. RDF and Data Integration from this Blog Data Space.

What is the Data Access, and Data Management Value Pyramid?

As depicted below, a top-down view of the data access and data management value chain. The term: apex, simply indicates value primacy, which takes the form of a data access API based entry point into a DBMS realm -- aligned to an underlying data model. Examples of data access APIs include: Native Call Level Interfaces (CLIs), ODBC, JDBC, ADO.NET, OLE-DB, XMLA, and Web Services.

The degree to which ad-hoc views of data managed by a DBMS can be produced and dispatched to relevant data consumers (e.g. people), without compromising concurrency, data durability, and security, collectively determine the "Agility Value Factor" (AVF) of a given DBMS. Remember, agility as the cornerstone of environmental adaptation is as old as the concept of evolution, and intrinsic to all pursuits of primacy.

In simpler business oriented terms, look at AVF as the degree to which DBMS technology affects the ability to effectively implement "Market Leadership Discipline" along the following pathways: innovation, operation excellence, or customer intimacy.

Why has RDBMS Primacy has Endured?

Historically, at least since the late '80s, the RDBMS genre of DBMS has consistently offered the highest AVF relative to other DBMS genres en route to primacy within the value pyramid. The desire to improve on paper reports and spreadsheets is basically what DBMS technology has fundamentally addressed to date, even though conceptual level interaction with data has never been its forte.

For more then 10 years -- at the very least -- limitations of the traditional RDBMS in the realm of conceptual level interaction with data across diverse data sources and schemas (enterprise, Web, and Internet) has been crystal clear to many RDBMS technology practitioners, as indicated by some of the quotes excerpted below:

"Future of Database Research is excellent, but what is the future of data?"

"..it is hard for me to disagree with the conclusions in this report. It captures exactly the right thoughts, and should be a must read for everyone involved in the area of databases and database research in particular."

-- Dr. Anant Jingran, CTO, IBM Information Management Systems, commenting on the 2007 RDBMS technology retreat attended by a number of key DBMS technology pioneers and researchers.

"One size fits all: A concept whose time has come and gone

1. They are direct descendants of System R and Ingres and were architected more than 25 years ago
2. They are advocating "one size fits all"; i.e. a single engine that solves all DBMS needs.

-- Prof. Michael Stonebreaker, one of the founding fathers of the RDBMS industry.

Until this point in time, the requisite confluence of "circumstantial pain" and "open standards" based technology required to enable an objective "compare and contrast" of RDBMS engine virtues and viable alternatives hasn't occurred. Thus, the RDBMS has endured it position of primacy albeit on a "one size fits all basis".

Circumstantial Pain

As mentioned earlier, we are in the midst of an economic crisis that is ultimately about a consistent inability to connect dots across a substrate of interlinked data sources that transcend traditional data access boundaries with high doses of schematic heterogeneity. Ironically, in a era of the dot-com, we haven't been able to make meaningful connections between relevant "real-world things" that extend beyond primitive data hosted database tables and content management style document containers; we've struggled to achieve this in the most basic sense, let alone evolve our ability to connect inline with the exponential rate at which the Internet & Web are spawning "universes of discourse" (data spaces) that emanate from user activity (within the enterprise and across the Internet & Web). In a nutshell, we haven't been able to upgrade our interaction with data such that "conceptual models" and resulting "context lenses" (or facets) become concrete; by this I mean: real-world entity interaction making its way into the computer realm as opposed to the impedance we all suffer today when we transition from conceptual model interaction (real-world) to logical model interaction (when dealing with RDBMS based data access and data management).

Here are some simple examples of what I can only best describe as: "critical dots unconnected", resulting from an inability to interact with data conceptually:

Financial regulatory bodies couldn't effectively discern that a Credit Default Swap is an Insurance policy in all but literal name. And in not doing so the cost of an unregulated insurance policy laid the foundation for exacerbating the toxicity of fatally flawed mortgage backed securities. Put simply: a flawed insurance policy was the fallback on a toxic security that financiers found exotic based on superficial packaging.

Banks still don't understand that capital really does exists in tangible and intangible forms; with the intangible being the variant that is inherently dynamic. For example, a tech companies intellectual capital far exceeds the value of fixture, fittings, and buildings, but you be amazed to find that in most cases this vital asset has not significant value when banks get down to the nitty gritty of debt collateral; instead, a buffer of flawed securitization has occurred atop a borderline static asset class covering the aforementioned buildings, fixtures, and fittings.

In the general enterprise arena, IT executives continued to "rip and replace" existing technology without ever effectively addressing the timeless inability to connect data across disparate data silos generated by internal enterprise applications, let alone the broader need to mesh data from the inside with external data sources. No correlations made between the growth of buzzwords and the compounding nature of data integration challenges. It's 2009 and only a miniscule number of executives dare fantasize about being anywhere within distance of the: relevant information at your fingertips vision.

Looking more holistically at data interaction in general, whether you interact with data in the enterprise space (i.e., at work) or on the Internet or Web, you ultimately are delving into a mishmash of disparate computer systems, applications, service (Web or SOA), and databases (of the RDBMS variety in a majority of cases) associated with a plethora of disparate schemas. Yes, but even today "rip and replace" is still the norm pushed by most vendors; pitting one mono culture against another as exemplified by irrelevances such as: FOSS/LAMP vs Commercial or Web vs. Enterprise, when none of this matters if the data access and integration issues are recognized let alone addressed (see: Applications are Like Fish and Data Like Wine).

Like the current credit-crunch, exponential growth of data originating from disparate application databases and associated schemas, within shrinking processing time frames, has triggered a rethinking of what defines data access and data management value today en route to an inevitable RDBMS downgrade within the value pyramid.

Technology

There have been many attempts to address real-world modeling requirements across the broader DBMS community from Object Databases to Object-Relational Databases, and more recently the emergence of simple Entity-Attribute-Value model DBMS engines. In all cases failure has come down to the existence of one or more of the following deficiencies, across each potential alternative:

1. Query language standardization - nothing close to SQL standardization
2. Data Access API standardization - nothing close to ODBC, JDBC, OLE-DB, or ADO.NET
3. Wire protocol standardization - nothing close to HTTP
4. Distributed Identity infrastructure - nothing close to the non-repudiatable digital Identity that foaf+ssl accords
5. Use of Identifiers as network based pointers to data sources - nothing close to RDF based Linked Data
6. Negotiable data representation - nothing close to Mime and HTTP based Content Negotiation
7. Scalability especially in the era of Internet & Web scale.

Entity-Attribute-Value with Classes & Relationships (EAV/CR) data models

A common characteristic shared by all post-relational DBMS management systems (from Object Relational to pure Object) is an orientation towards variations of EAV/CR based data models. Unfortunately, all efforts in the EAV/CR realm have typically suffered from at least one of the deficiencies listed above. In addition, the same "one DBMS model fits all" approach that lies at the heart of the RDBMS downgrade also exists in the EAV/CR realm.

What Comes Next?

The RDBMS is not going away (ever), but its era of primacy -- by virtue of its placement at the apex of the data access and data management value pyramid -- is over! I make this bold claim for the following reasons:

1. The Internet aided "Global Village" has brought "Open World" vs "Closed World" assumption issues to the fore e.g., the current global economic crisis remains centered on the inability to connect dots across "Open World" and "Closed World" data frontiers
2. Entity-Attribute-Value with Classes & Relationships (EAV/CR) based DBMS models are more effective when dealing with disparate data associated with disparate schemas, across disparate DBMS engines, host operating systems, and networks.

Based on the above, it is crystal clear that a different kind of DBMS -- one with higher AVF relative to the RDBMS -- needs to sit atop today's data access and data management value pyramid. The characteristics of this DBMS must include the following:

1. Every item of data (Datum/Entity/Object/Resource) has Identity
2. Identity is achieved via Identifiers that aren't locked at the DBMS, OS, Network, or Application levels
3. Object Identifiers and Object values are independent (extricably linked by association)
4. Object values should be de-referencable via Object Identifier
5. Representation of de-referenced value graph (entity, attributes, and values mesh) must be negotiable (i.e. content negotiation)
6. Structured query language must provide mechanism for Creation, Deletion, Updates, and Querying of data objects
7. Performance & Scalability across "Closed World" (enterprise) and "Open World" (Internet & Web) realms.

Quick recap, I am not saying that RDBMS engine technology is dead or obsolete. I am simply stating that the era of RDBMS primacy within the data access and data management value pyramid is over.

The problem domain (conceptual model views over heterogeneous data sources) at the apex of the aforementioned pyramid has simply evolved beyond the natural capabilities of the RDBMS which is rooted in "Closed World" assumptions re., data definition, access, and management. The need to maintain domain based conceptual interaction with data is now palpable at every echelon within our "Global Village" - Internet, Web, Enterprise, Government etc.

It is my personal view that an EAV/CR model based DBMS, with support for the seven items enumerated above, can trigger the long anticipated RDBMS downgrade. Such a DBMS would be inherently multi-model because you would need to the best of RDBMS and EAV/CR model engines in a single product, with in-built support for HTTP and other Internet protocols in order to effectively address data representation and serialization issues.

EAV/CR Oriented Data Access & Management Technology

Examples of contemporary EAV/CR frameworks that provide concrete conceptual layers for data access and data management currently include:

• Resource Description Framework (RDF) - an EAV/CR based framework
• RDF Linked Data - EAV/CR based framework that mandates de-referencable HTTP based Identifiers
• ADO.NET Entity Frameworks - Microsoft .NET based EAV/CR framework
• Core Data Services - Mac OS X based EAV/CR framework that evolved from NeXT's Enterprise Object Frameworks (EOF).

The frameworks above provide the basis for a revised AVF pyramid, as depicted below, that reflects today's data access and management realities i.e., an Internet & Web driven global village comprised of interlinked distributed data objects, compatible with "Open World" assumptions.

Related

• How & Why Glue is Using Amazon SimpleDB
• Object Database Manifesto (Identity excerpt)
• Database Models Overview
• Ted Nelson Explaining Irregularity and Idiosyncrasy of Data Structures - ZigZag Demo

What is the Data Access, and Data Management Value Pyramid?

As depicted below, a top-down view of the data access and data management value chain. The term: apex, simply indicates value primacy, which takes the form of a data access API based entry point into a DBMS realm -- aligned to an underlying data model. Examples of data access APIs include: Native Call Level Interfaces (CLIs), ODBC, JDBC, ADO.NET, OLE-DB, XMLA, and Web Services.

The degree to which ad-hoc views of data managed by a DBMS can be produced and dispatched to relevant data consumers (e.g. people), without compromising concurrency, data durability, and security, collectively determine the "Agility Value Factor" (AVF) of a given DBMS. Remember, agility as the cornerstone of environmental adaptation is as old as the concept of evolution, and intrinsic to all pursuits of primacy.

In simpler business oriented terms, look at AVF as the degree to which DBMS technology affects the ability to effectively implement "Market Leadership Discipline" along the following pathways: innovation, operation excellence, or customer intimacy.

Why has RDBMS Primacy has Endured?

Historically, at least since the late '80s, the RDBMS genre of DBMS has consistently offered the highest AVF relative to other DBMS genres en route to primacy within the value pyramid. The desire to improve on paper reports and spreadsheets is basically what DBMS technology has fundamentally addressed to date, even though conceptual level interaction with data has never been its forte.

For more then 10 years -- at the very least -- limitations of the traditional RDBMS in the realm of conceptual level interaction with data across diverse data sources and schemas (enterprise, Web, and Internet) has been crystal clear to many RDBMS technology practitioners, as indicated by some of the quotes excerpted below:

"Future of Database Research is excellent, but what is the future of data?"

"..it is hard for me to disagree with the conclusions in this report. It captures exactly the right thoughts, and should be a must read for everyone involved in the area of databases and database research in particular."

-- Dr. Anant Jingran, CTO, IBM Information Management Systems, commenting on the 2007 RDBMS technology retreat attended by a number of key DBMS technology pioneers and researchers.

"One size fits all: A concept whose time has come and gone

1. They are direct descendants of System R and Ingres and were architected more than 25 years ago
2. They are advocating "one size fits all"; i.e. a single engine that solves all DBMS needs.

-- Prof. Michael Stonebreaker, one of the founding fathers of the RDBMS industry.

Until this point in time, the requisite confluence of "circumstantial pain" and "open standards" based technology required to enable an objective "compare and contrast" of RDBMS engine virtues and viable alternatives hasn't occurred. Thus, the RDBMS has endured it position of primacy albeit on a "one size fits all basis".

Circumstantial Pain

As mentioned earlier, we are in the midst of an economic crisis that is ultimately about a consistent inability to connect dots across a substrate of interlinked data sources that transcend traditional data access boundaries with high doses of schematic heterogeneity. Ironically, in a era of the dot-com, we haven't been able to make meaningful connections between relevant "real-world things" that extend beyond primitive data hosted database tables and content management style document containers; we've struggled to achieve this in the most basic sense, let alone evolve our ability to connect inline with the exponential rate at which the Internet & Web are spawning "universes of discourse" (data spaces) that emanate from user activity (within the enterprise and across the Internet & Web). In a nutshell, we haven't been able to upgrade our interaction with data such that "conceptual models" and resulting "context lenses" (or facets) become concrete; by this I mean: real-world entity interaction making its way into the computer realm as opposed to the impedance we all suffer today when we transition from conceptual model interaction (real-world) to logical model interaction (when dealing with RDBMS based data access and data management).

Here are some simple examples of what I can only best describe as: "critical dots unconnected", resulting from an inability to interact with data conceptually:

Financial regulatory bodies couldn't effectively discern that a Credit Default Swap is an Insurance policy in all but literal name. And in not doing so the cost of an unregulated insurance policy laid the foundation for exacerbating the toxicity of fatally flawed mortgage backed securities. Put simply: a flawed insurance policy was the fallback on a toxic security that financiers found exotic based on superficial packaging.

Banks still don't understand that capital really does exists in tangible and intangible forms; with the intangible being the variant that is inherently dynamic. For example, a tech companies intellectual capital far exceeds the value of fixture, fittings, and buildings, but you be amazed to find that in most cases this vital asset has not significant value when banks get down to the nitty gritty of debt collateral; instead, a buffer of flawed securitization has occurred atop a borderline static asset class covering the aforementioned buildings, fixtures, and fittings.

In the general enterprise arena, IT executives continued to "rip and replace" existing technology without ever effectively addressing the timeless inability to connect data across disparate data silos generated by internal enterprise applications, let alone the broader need to mesh data from the inside with external data sources. No correlations made between the growth of buzzwords and the compounding nature of data integration challenges. It's 2009 and only a miniscule number of executives dare fantasize about being anywhere within distance of the: relevant information at your fingertips vision.

Looking more holistically at data interaction in general, whether you interact with data in the enterprise space (i.e., at work) or on the Internet or Web, you ultimately are delving into a mishmash of disparate computer systems, applications, service (Web or SOA), and databases (of the RDBMS variety in a majority of cases) associated with a plethora of disparate schemas. Yes, but even today "rip and replace" is still the norm pushed by most vendors; pitting one mono culture against another as exemplified by irrelevances such as: FOSS/LAMP vs Commercial or Web vs. Enterprise, when none of this matters if the data access and integration issues are recognized let alone addressed (see: Applications are Like Fish and Data Like Wine).

Like the current credit-crunch, exponential growth of data originating from disparate application databases and associated schemas, within shrinking processing time frames, has triggered a rethinking of what defines data access and data management value today en route to an inevitable RDBMS downgrade within the value pyramid.

Technology

There have been many attempts to address real-world modeling requirements across the broader DBMS community from Object Databases to Object-Relational Databases, and more recently the emergence of simple Entity-Attribute-Value model DBMS engines. In all cases failure has come down to the existence of one or more of the following deficiencies, across each potential alternative:

1. Query language standardization - nothing close to SQL standardization
2. Data Access API standardization - nothing close to ODBC, JDBC, OLE-DB, or ADO.NET
3. Wire protocol standardization - nothing close to HTTP
4. Distributed Identity infrastructure - nothing close to the non-repudiatable digital Identity that foaf+ssl accords
5. Use of Identifiers as network based pointers to data sources - nothing close to RDF based Linked Data
6. Negotiable data representation - nothing close to Mime and HTTP based Content Negotiation
7. Scalability especially in the era of Internet & Web scale.

Entity-Attribute-Value with Classes & Relationships (EAV/CR) data models

A common characteristic shared by all post-relational DBMS management systems (from Object Relational to pure Object) is an orientation towards variations of EAV/CR based data models. Unfortunately, all efforts in the EAV/CR realm have typically suffered from at least one of the deficiencies listed above. In addition, the same "one DBMS model fits all" approach that lies at the heart of the RDBMS downgrade also exists in the EAV/CR realm.

What Comes Next?

The RDBMS is not going away (ever), but its era of primacy -- by virtue of its placement at the apex of the data access and data management value pyramid -- is over! I make this bold claim for the following reasons:

1. The Internet aided "Global Village" has brought "Open World" vs "Closed World" assumption issues to the fore e.g., the current global economic crisis remains centered on the inability to connect dots across "Open World" and "Closed World" data frontiers
2. Entity-Attribute-Value with Classes & Relationships (EAV/CR) based DBMS models are more effective when dealing with disparate data associated with disparate schemas, across disparate DBMS engines, host operating systems, and networks.

Based on the above, it is crystal clear that a different kind of DBMS -- one with higher AVF relative to the RDBMS -- needs to sit atop today's data access and data management value pyramid. The characteristics of this DBMS must include the following:

1. Every item of data (Datum/Entity/Object/Resource) has Identity
2. Identity is achieved via Identifiers that aren't locked at the DBMS, OS, Network, or Application levels
3. Object Identifiers and Object values are independent (extricably linked by association)
4. Object values should be de-referencable via Object Identifier
5. Representation of de-referenced value graph (entity, attributes, and values mesh) must be negotiable (i.e. content negotiation)
6. Structured query language must provide mechanism for Creation, Deletion, Updates, and Querying of data objects
7. Performance & Scalability across "Closed World" (enterprise) and "Open World" (Internet & Web) realms.

Quick recap, I am not saying that RDBMS engine technology is dead or obsolete. I am simply stating that the era of RDBMS primacy within the data access and data management value pyramid is over.

The problem domain (conceptual model views over heterogeneous data sources) at the apex of the aforementioned pyramid has simply evolved beyond the natural capabilities of the RDBMS which is rooted in "Closed World" assumptions re., data definition, access, and management. The need to maintain domain based conceptual interaction with data is now palpable at every echelon within our "Global Village" - Internet, Web, Enterprise, Government etc.

It is my personal view that an EAV/CR model based DBMS, with support for the seven items enumerated above, can trigger the long anticipated RDBMS downgrade. Such a DBMS would be inherently multi-model because you would need to the best of RDBMS and EAV/CR model engines in a single product, with in-built support for HTTP and other Internet protocols in order to effectively address data representation and serialization issues.

EAV/CR Oriented Data Access & Management Technology

Examples of contemporary EAV/CR frameworks that provide concrete conceptual layers for data access and data management currently include:

• Resource Description Framework (RDF) - an EAV/CR based framework
• RDF Linked Data - EAV/CR based framework that mandates de-referencable HTTP based Identifiers
• ADO.NET Entity Frameworks - Microsoft .NET based EAV/CR framework
• Core Data Services - Mac OS X based EAV/CR framework that evolved from NeXT's Enterprise Object Frameworks (EOF).

The frameworks above provide the basis for a revised AVF pyramid, as depicted below, that reflects today's data access and management realities i.e., an Internet & Web driven global village comprised of interlinked distributed data objects, compatible with "Open World" assumptions.

Related

• The Semantic Way - Alan Cho's Summary of PwC 2009 tech forecast report on the Semantic Web
• Is the RDBMS Doomed - ReadWriteWeb Article
• Anti-RDBMS: a list of Distributed Key-Value Stores - by Richard Jones (CTO Last.FM)
• How & Why Glue is Using Amazon SimpleDB
• Object Database Manifesto (Identity excerpt)
• Database Models Overview
• Ted Nelson Explaining Irregularity and Idiosyncrasy of Data Structures - ZigZag Demo

What is our "Search" and "Find" demonstration about? It is about how you use the "Description" of "Things" to unambiguously locate things in a database at Web Scale.

To our perpetual chagrin, we are trying to demonstrate an engine -- not UI prowess -- but the immediate response is to jump to the UI aesthetics.

Google, Yahoo etc.. offer a simple input form for full text search patterns, they have a processing window for completing full text searches across Web Content indexed on their servers. Once the search patterns are processed, you get a page ranked result set (collection of Web pages basically that claim/state: we found N pages out of a document corpus of about M indexed pages).

Note: the estimate aspect of traditional search results in like "advertising small print" the user lives with the illusion that all possible documents on the Web (or even Internet) have been searched whereas in reality: 25% of the possible total is a major stretch; since the Web and Internet are fractal networks and scale-free, inherently growing at exponential rates "ad infinitum" across boundless dimensions of human comprehension.

The power of Linked Data ultimately comes down to the fact that the user constructs the path to what they seek via the properties of the "Things" in question. The routes are not hardwired since URI de-referencing (follow your nose pattern) is available to Linked Data aware query engines and crawlers.

We are simply trying to demonstrate how you can combine the best of full text search with the best of structured querying while reusing familiar interaction patterns from Google/Yahoo. Thus, you start with full text search, find get all the entities associated with the pattern, then use the entity types or entity properties to find what you seek.

You state in your post:

"To state the obvious caveat, the claim OpenLink is making about this demo is not that it delivers better search-term relevance, therefore the ranking of searching results is not the main criteria on which it is intended to be assessed."

Correct.

"On the other hand, one of the things they are bragging about is that their server will automatically cut off long-running queries. So how do you like your first page of results?".

Not exactly correct. We are performing aggregates using a configurable interactive time factor. Example: tell me how many entities of type: Person, with interest: Semantic Web, exist in this database within 2 seconds. Also understand that you could retry the same query and get different numbers within the same interactive time factor. It isn't your basic "query cut-off".

"And on the other other hand, the big claim OpenLink is making about this demo is that the aggregate experience of using it is better than the aggregate experience of using "traditional" search. So go ahead, use it. If you can."

Yes, "Microsoft" was a poor example for sure, the example could have been pattern: "glenn mcdonald", which should demonstrate the fundamental utility of what we are trying to demonstrate i.e., entity disambiguation courtesy of entity properties and/or entity type filtering.

Compare Googles results for: Glenn McDonald with those from our demo (which dissambiguate "Glenn McDonald" via associated properties and/or types), assuming we both agree that your Web Site or Blog Home isn't the center of your entity graph or personal data space (i.e., data about you); so getting your home page at the top of the Google page rank offers limited value, in reality.

What are we bragging about? A little more than what you attempt to explain. Yes, we are showing that we can find stuff within a processing window, but understand the following:

• Processing Time Window (or interactive time) is configurable
• Data Corpus is a Billion+ Triples (from Billion Triples Challenge Data Set)
• SPARQL doesn't have Aggregation capabilities by default (we have implemented SPARQL-BI to deliver aggregates for analytics against large data sets, we even handle the TPC-H industry standard benchmark with SPARQL-BI)
• Paging isn't possible without aggregates, and doing aggregates on a Billion+ triples as part of a query processing cycle isn't trivial stuff (otherwise it would be everywhere due to inherent and obvious necessity).

I hope I've clarified what's going on with our demo? If not, pose your challenge via examples and I will respond with solutions or simply cry out loud: "no mas!".

As for your "Mac OX X Leopard" comments, I can only say this: I emphasized that this is a demo, the data is pretty old, and the input data has issues (i.e. some of the input data is bad as your example shows). The purpose of this demo is not about the text per se., it's about the size of the data corpus and faceted querying. We are going to have the entire LOD Cloud loaded into the real thing, and in addition to that our Sponger Middleware will be enabled, and then you can take issue with data quality as per your reference to "Cyndi Lauper" (btw - it takes one property filter to find information about her quickly using "dbpprop:name" after filtering for properties with text values).

Of all things, this demo had nothing to do with UI and Information presentation aesthetics. It was all about combining full text search and structured queries (sparql behind the scenes) against a huge data corpus en route to solving challenges associated with faceted browsing over large data sets. We have built a service that resides inside Virtuoso. The Service is naturally of the "Web Service" variety and can be used from any consumer / client environment that speaks HTTP (directly or indirectly).

To be continued ...

A pre-installed and fully tuned edition of Virtuoso that includes a fully configured DBpedia instance on Amazon's EC2 Cloud platform.

Benefits?

Generally, it provides a no hassles mechanism for instantiating personal, organization, or service specific instances of DBpedia within approximately 1.5 hours as opposed to a lengthy rebuild from RDF source data that takes between 8 - 22 hours depending on machine hardware configuration and host operating system resources.

From a Web Entrepreneur perspective it offers all of the generic benefits of a Virtuoso EC2 AMI plus the following:

1. Instant bootstrap of a dense Lookup Hub for Linked Data Web oriented solutions
2. No exposure to any of the complexities and nuances associated with deployment of dereferencable URIs (you have a DBpedia replica)
3. Predictable performance and scalability due localization of query processing (you aren't sharing the public DBpedia server with the rest of the world).

Features:

1. DBpedia public instance functionality replica (re. RDF and (X)HTML resource description representations & SPARQL endpoint)
2. Local URI de-referencing (so no contention with public endpoint) as part of the Linked Data Deployment
3. Fully tuned Virtuoso instance for DBpedia data set hosting.

How Do I Get Started?

Here are a few live examples of DBpedia resource URIs deployed and de-referencable via one of my EC2 based personal data spaces:

• Linked Data
• Entity-Attribute-Value (aka. Triples) Model
• Hyperdata Linking (aka. Object Hyperlinking)
• Barack Obama

A pre-installed edition of Virtuoso for Amazon's EC2 Cloud platform.

What does it offer?

1. Low cost entry point to a game-changing Web 3.0+ (and beyond) platform that combines SQL, RDF, XML, and Web Services functionality
2. Flexible variable cost model (courtesy of EC2 DevPay) tightly bound to revenue generated by your services
3. Delivers federated and/or centralized model flexibility for you SaaS based solutions
4. Simple entry point for developing and deploying sophisticated database driven applications (SQL or RDF Linked Data Web oriented)
5. Complete framework for exploiting OpenID, OAuth (including Role enhancements) that simplifies exploitation of these vital Identity and Data Access technologies
6. Easily implement RDF Linked Data based Mail, Blogging, Wikis, Bookmarks, Calendaring, Discussion Forums, Tagging, Social-Networking as Data Space (data containers) features of your application or service offering
7. Instant alleviation of challenges (e.g. service costs and agility) associated with Data Portability and Open Data Access across Web 2.0 data silos
8. LDAP integration for Intranet / Extranet style applications.

From the DBMS engine perspective it provides you with one or more pre-configured instances of Virtuoso that enable immediate exploitation of the following services:

1. RDF Database (a Quad Store with SPARQL & SPARUL Language & Protocol support)
2. SQL Database (with ODBC, JDBC, OLE-DB, ADO.NET, and XMLA driver access)
3. XML Database (XML Schema, XQuery/Xpath, XSLT, Full Text Indexing)
4. Full Text Indexing.

From a Middleware perspective it provides:

1. RDF Views (Wrappers / Semantic Covers) over SQL, XML, and other data sources accessible via SOAP or REST style Web Services
2. Sponger Service for converting non RDF information resources into RDF Linked Data "on the fly" via a large collection of pre-installed RDFizer Cartridges.

From the Web Server Platform perspective it provides an alternative to LAMP stack components such as MySQL and Apace by offering

1. HTTP Web Server
2. WebDAV Server
3. Web Application Server (includes PHP runtime hosting)
4. SOAP or REST style Web Services Deployment
5. RDF Linked Data Deployment
6. SPARQL (SPARQL Query Language) and SPARUL (SPARQL Update Language) endpoints
7. Virtuoso Hosted PHP packages for MediaWiki, Drupal, Wordpress, and phpBB3 (just install the relevant Virtuoso Distro. Package).

From the general System Administrator's perspective it provides:

1. Online Backups (Backup Set dispatched to S3 buckets, FTP, or HTTP/WebDAV server locations)
2. Synchronized Incremental Backups to Backup Set locations
3. Backup Restore from Backup Set location (without exiting to EC2 shell).

Higher level user oriented offerings include:

1. OpenLink Data Explorer front-end for exploring the burgeoning Linked Data Web
2. Ajax based SPARQL Query Builder (iSPARQL) that enables SPARQL Query construction by Example
3. Ajax based SQL Query Builder (QBE) that enables SQL Query construction by Example.

For Web 2.0 / 3.0 users, developers, and entrepreneurs it offers it includes Distributed Collaboration Tools & Social Media realm functionality courtesy of ODS that includes:

1. Point of presence on the Linked Data Web that meshes your Identity and your Data via URIs
2. System generated Social Network Profile & Contact Data via FOAF?
3. System generated SIOC (Semantically Interconnected Online Community) Data Space (that includes a Social Graph) exposing all your Web data in RDF Linked Data form
4. System generated OpenID and automatic integration with FOAF
5. Transparent Data Integration across Facebook, Digg, LinkedIn, FriendFeed, Twitter, and any other Web 2.0 data space equipped with RSS / Atom support and/or REST style Web Services
6. In-built support for SyncML which enables data synchronization with Mobile Phones.

How Do I Get Going with It?

• Standard Installation Guide
• Personal or Service Specific DBpedia Installation Guide

Basically this is how it works.

1. Instantiate a Virtuoso EC2 AMI (paid variety)
2. Install the special EC2 extensions (ec2ext_dav.vad) VAD via the Conductor UI or iSQL
3. Restore the Virtuoso+DBpedia backup from our S3 bucket
4. After approx. 1 hr, you will have a complete DBpedia replica in your own data space on the Linked Data Web.

DBpedia replica implies:

1. SPARQL Endpoint
2. Linked Data Viewer Pages (as you see in the public DBpedia instance)
3. All requisite re-write rules for URI de-referencing and attribution (i.e., low cost triples that links back to main DBpedia using terms from our little Attribution Ontology)
4. All the inference rules for UMBEL, YAGO, OpenCYC, and DBpedia-OWL data dictionaries
5. All Full Text Indexes
6. All Bitmap Indexes.

Tomorrow is the official go live day (due to last minute price changes), but you can instantiate a paid Virtuoso AMI starting now :-)

To be continued...

If we could just take "The Semantic Web" moniker for what it was -- a code name for an aspect of the Web -- and move on, things will get much clearer, fast!

Basically, what is/was the "Semantic Web" should really have been code named: ("You" Oriented Data Access) as a play on: Yoda's appreciation of the FORCE (Fact ORiented Connected Entities) -- the power of inter galactic, interlinked, structured data, fashioned by the World Wide Web courtesy of the HTTP protocol.

As stated in a earlier post, the next phase of the Web is all about the magic of entity "You". The single most important item of reference to every Web user would be the Person Entity ID (URI). Just by remembering your Entity ID, you will have intelligent pathways across, and into, the FORCE that the Linked Data Web delivers. The quality of the pathways and increased density of the FORCE are the keys to high SDQ (tomorrows SEO). Thus, the SDQ of URIs will ultimately be the unit determinant of value to Web Users, along the following personal lines, hence the critical platform questions:

• Does your platform give me Identity (a URI) with high SDQ?
• Do the Data Source Names (URIs) in your Data Spaces deliver high SDQ?

While most industry commentators continue to ponder and pontificate about what "The Semantic Web" is (unfortunately), the real thing (the "FORCE") is already here, and self-enhancing rapidly.

Assuming we now accept the FORCE is simply an RDF based Linked Data moniker, and that RDF Linked Data is all about the Web as a structured database, we should start to move our attention over to practical exploitation of this burgeoning global database, and in doing so we should not discard knowledge from the past such as the many great examples available gratis from the Relational Database realm. For instance, we should start paying attention to the discovery, development, and deployment of high level tools such as query builders, report writers, and intelligence oriented analytic tools, none of which should -- at first point of interaction -- expose raw RDF or the SPARQL query language. Along similar lines of thinking, we also need development environments and frameworks that are counterparts to Visual Studio, ACCESS, File Maker, and the like.

Related

• Numerati & The Magic of You!

From the RWW Top-Down category, which I interpret as: technologies that produce RDF from non RDF data sources. Our product portfolio is comprised of the following; Virtuoso Universal Server, OpenLink Data Spaces, OpenLink Ajax Toolkit, and OpenLink Data Explorer (which includes ubiquity commands).

Virtuoso Universal Server functionality summary:

1. Generation of RDF Linked Data Views of SQL, XML, and Web Services in general
2. Deployment of RDF Linked Data
3. "On the Fly" generation of RDF Linked Data from Document Web information resources (i.e. distillation of entities from their containers e.g. Web pages) via Cartridges / Drivers
4. SPARQL query language support
5. SPARQL extensions that bring SPARQL closer to SQL e.g Aggregates, Update, Insert, Delete Named Graph support (i.e. use of logical names to partition RDF data within Virtuoso's multi-model dbms engine)
6. Inference Engine (currently in use re. DBpedia via Yago and UMBEL)
7. Host and exposes data from Drupal, Wordpress, MediaWiki, phpBB3 as RDF Linked Data via in-built support for PHP runtime
8. Available as an EC2 AMI
9. etc..

OpenLink Data Spaces functionality summary:

1. Simple mechanism for Linked Data Web enabling yourself by giving you an HTTP based User ID (a de-referencable URI) that is linked to a FOAF based Profile page and OpenID
2. Binds all your data sources (blogs, wikis, bookmarks, photos, calendar items etc. ) to your URI so can "Find" things by only remembering your URI
3. Makes your profile page and personal URI the focal point of Linked Data Web presence
4. Delivers Data Portability (using data access by value or data access by reference) across data silos (e.g. Web 2.0 style social networks)
5. Allows you make annotations about anything in your own Data Space(s) on the Web without exposure to RDF markup
6. A Briefcase feature that provides a WebDAV driven RDF Linked Data variant of functionality seen in Mac OS X Spotlight and WinFS with the addition of SPARQL compliance
7. Automatically generates RDFa in its (X)HTML pages
8. Blog, Wiki, WebDAV File Server, Shared Bookmarks, Calendar, and other applications that look and feel like Web 2.0 counterparts but emitt RDF Linked Data amongst a plethora of data exchange formats
9. Available as an EC2 AMI
10. etc..

OpenLink Ajax Toolkit functionality summary:

1. Provides binding to SQL, RDF, XML, and Web Services via Ajax Database Connectivity Layer (you only need an ODBC, JDBC, OLE-DB, ADO.NET, XMLA Driver, or Web Service on the backend for dynamic data access from Javascript)
2. All controls are Ajax Database Connectivity bound (widgets get their data from Ajax Database Connectivity data sources)
3. Bundled with Virtuoso and ODS installations.
4. etc.

OpenLink Data Explorer functionality summary

1. Distills entities associated with information resource style containers (e.g. Web Pages or files) as RDF Linked Data
2. Exposes the RDF based Linked Data graph associated with information resources (see the Linked Data behind Web pages)
3. Ubiquity commands for invoking the above
4. Available as a Hosted Service or Firefox Extension
5. Bundled with Virtuoso and ODS installations
6. etc.

Note:

Of course you could have simply looked up OpenLink Software's FOAF based Profile page (*note the Linked Data Explorer tab*), or simply passed the FOAF profile page URL to a Linked Data aware client application such as: OpenLink Data Explorer, Zitgist Data Viewer, Marbles, and Tabulator, and obtained information. Remember, OpenLink Software is an Entity of Type: foaf:Organization, on the burgeoning Linked Data Web :-)

Related

• Linked Data Planet Keynote (RDFa based remix edition)
• On The Cusp: A Global Review of the Semantic Web Industry.

Over emphasis on Description Logics (RDFS, OWL, Inference & Reasoning etc) matters without any actual real-world instance data (e.g., lot's of reasoning over RDF in zip files or local drives).

All about Linking Openly accessible RDF Data Sets

Over emphasis on Instance Data without Data Dictionary appreciation and utilization (e.g., Linked Data instance level linkage via "owl:sameAs").

All about Applications & Frameworks

Here we are dealing with numerous applications and frameworks that inextricably bind Instance Data Management and Data Dictionaries. Basically, an all or nothing proposition, if you want to delve into the RDF Linked Data solutions realm.

Often overlooked, is the fact that the Linked Data Web - as an aspect of the Semantic Web innovation continuum - is fundamentally about designing and constructing an "Open World" compatible DBMS for the Internet. Thus, erstwhile "Closed World" DBMS components such as Data Dictionaries (handlers of Data Definition, Referential Integrity etc.) and actual Instance Data, are now distributed and loosely coupled. Thus, your data could be in one Data Space while the data dictionary resides in another. In actual fact, you could have several loosely bound data dictionaries that serve the specific Inference and Reasoning needs of a variety of applications, services, or agents.

Understanding potential Linked Data Web business models, relative to other Web based market segments, is best pursued via a BCG Matrix diagram, such as the one I've constructed below:

Notes:

Link Density

• Web 1.0's collection of "Web Sites" have relatively low link density relative to Web 2.0's user-activity driven generation of semi-structured linked data spaces (e.g., Blogs, Wikis, Shared Bookmarks, RSS/Atom Feeds, Photo Galleries, Discussion Forums etc..)
• Semantic Technologies (i.e. "Semantics Inside style solutions") which are primarily about "Semantic Meaning" culled from Web 1.0 Pages also have limited linked density relative to Web 2.0
• The Linked Data Web, courtesy of the open-ended linking capacity of URIs, matches and ultimately exceeds Web 2.0 link density.

Relevance

• Web 1.0 and 2.0 are low relevance realms driven by hyperlinks to information resources ((X)HTML, RSS, Atom, OPML, XML, Images, Audio files etc.) associated with Literal Labels and Tagging schemes devoid of explicit property based resource description thereby making the pursuit of relevance mercurial at best
• Semantic Technologies offer more relevance than Web 1.0 and 2.0 based on the increased context that semantic analysis of Web pages accords
• The Linked Data Web, courtesy of URIs that expose self-describing data entities, match the relevance levels attained by Semantic Technologies.

Serendipity Quotient (SDQ)

• Web 1.0 has next to no serendipity, the closest thing is Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" button
• Web 2.0 possess higher potential for serendipitous discovery than Web 1.0, but such potential is neutralized by inherent subjectivity due to its human-interaction-focused literal foundation (e.g., tags, voting schemes, wiki editors etc.)
• Semantic Technologies produce islands-of-relevance with little scope for serendipitous discovery due to URI invisibility, since the prime focus is delivering more context to Web search relative to traditional Web 1.0 search engines.
• The Linked Data Web's use of URIs as the naming and resolution mechanism for exposing structured and interlinked resources provides the highest potential for serendipitous discovery of relevant "Things"

To conclude, the Linked Data Web's market opportunities are all about the evolution of the Web into a powerful substrate that offers a unique intersection of "Link Density" and "Relevance", exploitable across horizontal and vertical market segments to solutions providers. Put differently, SDQ is how you take "The Ad" out of "Advertising" when matching Web users to relevant things :-)

Jana: What are the benefits you see to the business community in adopting semantic technology?

Me: Exposure, exploitation, of untapped treasure trove of interlinked data, information, and knowledge across disparate IT infrastructure via conceptual entry points (Entity IDs / URIs / Data Source Names) that refer to as "Context Lenses".

Jana: Do you think these benefits are great enough for businesses to adopt the changes?

Me: Yes, infrastructural heterogeneity is a fact of corporate life (growth, mergers, acquisitions etc). Any technology that addresses these challenges is extremely important and valuable. Put differently, the opportunity costs associated with IT infrastructural heterogeneity remains high!

Jana: How large do you think this impact will actually be?

Me: Huge, enterprise have been aware of their data, information, and knowledge treasure troves etc. for eons. Tapping into these via a materialization of the "information at your fingertips" vision is something they've simply been waiting to pursue without any platform lock-in, for as long as I've been in this industry.

Jana: I’ve heard, from contacts in the Bay Area, that they are skeptical of how large this impact of semantic technology will actually be on the web itself, but that the best uses of the technology are for fields such as medical information, or as you mentioned, geo-spatial data.

Me: Unfortunately, those people aren't connecting the Semantic Web and open access to heterogeneous data sources, or the intrinsic value of holistic exploration location of entity based data networks (aka Linked Data).

Jana: Are semantic technologies going to be part of the web because of people championing the cause or because it is actually a necessary step?

Me: Linked Data technology on the Web is a vital extension of the current Web. Semantic Technology without the "Web" component, or what I refer to as "Semantics Inside only" solutions, simply offer little or no value as Web enhancements based on their incongruence with the essence of the Web i.e., "Open Linkage" and no Silos! A nice looking Silo is still a Silo.

Jana: In the early days of the web, there was an explosion of new websites, due to the ease of learning HTML, from a business to a person to some crackpot talking about aliens. Even today, CSS and XHTML are not so difficult to learn that a determined person can’t learn them from W3C or other tutorials easily. If OWL becomes the norm for websites, what do you think the effects will be on the web? Do you think it is easy enough to learn that it will be readily adopted as part of the standard toolkit for web developers for businesses?

Me: Correction, learning HTML had nothing to do with the Web's success. The value proposition of the Web simply reached critical mass and you simply couldn't afford to not be part of it. The easiest route to joining the Web juggernaut was a Web Page hosted on a Web Site. The question right now is: what's the equivalent driver for the Linked Data Web bearing in mind the initial Web bootstrap. My answer is simply this: Open Data Access i.e., getting beyond the data silos that have inadvertently emerged from Web 2.0.

Jana: Following the same theme, do you think this will lead to an internet full of corporate-controlled websites, with sites only written by developers rather than individuals?

Me: Not at all, we will have an Internet owned by it's participants i.e., You and the agents that work on your behalf.

Jana: So, you are imagining technologies such as Drupal or Wordpress, that allow users to manage sites without a great deal of knowledge of the nuts and bolts of current web technologies?

Me: Not at all! I envisage simple forms that provide conduits to powerful meshes of interlinked data spaces associated with Web users.

Jana: Given all of the buzz, and my own familiarity with ontology, I am just very curious if the semantic web is truly necessary?

Me:This question is no different than saying: I hear the Web is becoming a Database, and I wonder if a Data Dictionary is necessary, or even if access to structured data is necessary. It's also akin to saying: I accept "Search" as my only mechanism for Web interaction even though in reality, I really want to be able to "Find" and "Process" relevant things at a quicker rate than I do today, relative to the amount of information, and information processing time, at my disposal.

Jana: Will it be worth it to most people to go away from the web in its current form, with keyword searches on sites like Google, to a richer and more interconnected internet with potentially better search technology?

Me: As stated above, we need to add "Find" to the portfolio of functions we seek to perform against the Web. "Finding" and "Searching" are mutually inclusive pursuits at different ends of an activity spectrum.

Jana: For our more technical readers, I have a few additional questions: If no standardization comes about for mapping relational databases to domain ontologies, how do you see that as influencing the decisions about adoption of semantic technology by businesses? After all, the success of technology often lives or dies on its ease of adoption.

Me: Standardization of RDBMS to RDF Mapping is not the critical success factor here (of course it would be nice). As stated earlier, the issue of data integration that arises from IT infrastructural heterogeneity has been with decision makers in the enterprise for ever. The problem is now seeping into the broader consumer realm via Web ubiquity. The mistakes made in the enterprise realm are now playing out in the consumer Web realm. In both realms the critical success factors are:

1. Scalable productivity relative to exponential growth of data generated across Intranets, Extranets, and the Internet
2. Concept based Context Lenses that transcend logical and physical data heterogeneity by putting dereferencable URIs in front of the Line of Business Application Data and/or Web Data Spaces such as Blogs, Wikis, Discussion Forums etc.).

Ansgar Bernardi, deputy head of the Knowledge Management Department at Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz (DFKI, or the German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence) and Nepomuk's coordinator, explains, "The basic problem that we all face nowadays is how to handle vast amounts of information at a sensible rate." According to Bernardi, Nepomuk takes a traditional approach by creating a meta-data layer with well-defined elements that services can be built upon to create and manipulate the information.

The comment above echoes my sentiments about the imminence of "information overload" due to the vast amounts of user generated content on the Internet as a whole. We are going to need to process more an more data within a fixed 24 hour timeframe, while attempting to balance our professional and personal lives. Be rest assured, this is a very serious issue, and you cannot event begin to address it without a Web of Linked Data.

"The first idea of building the semantic desktop arose from the fact that one of our colleagues could not remember the girlfriends of his friends," Bernard says, more than half-seriously. "Because they kept changing -- you know how it is. The point is, you have a vast amount of information on your desktop, hidden in files, hidden in emails, hidden in the names and structures of your folders. Nepomuk gives a standard way to handle such information."

If you get a personal URI for Entity "You", via a Linked Data aware platform (e.g. OpenLink Data Spaces) that virtualizes data across your existing Web data spaces (blogs, feed subscriptions, wikis, shared bookmarks, photo galleries, calendars, etc.), you then only have to remember your URI whenever you need to "Find" something, imagine that!

To conclude, "information overload" is the imminent challenge of our time, and the keys to challenge alleviation lie in our ability to construct and maintain (via solutions) few context lenses (URIs) that provide coherent conduits into the dense mesh of structured Linked Data on the Web.

CrunchBase: When we released the CrunchBase API, you were one of the first developers to step up and quickly released a CrunchBase Sponger Cartridge. Can you explain what a CrunchBase Sponger Cartridge is?

Me: A Sponger Cartridge is a data access driver for Web Resources that plugs into our Virtuoso Universal Server (DBMS and Linked Data Web Server combo amongst other things). It uses the internal structure of a resource and/or a web service associated with a resource, to materialize an RDF based Linked Data graph that essentially describes the resource via its properties (Attributes & Relationships).

CrunchBase: And what inspired you to create it?

Me: Bengee built a new space with your data, and we've built a space on the fly from your data which still resides in your domain. Either solution extols the virtues of Linked Data i.e. the ability to explore relationships across data items with high degrees of serendipity (also colloquially known as: following-your-nose pattern in Semantic Web circles).

Bengee posted a notice to the Linking Open Data Community's public mailing list announcing his effort. Bearing in mind the fact that we've been using middleware to mesh the realms of Web 2.0 and the Linked Data Web for a while, it was a no-brainer to knock something up based on the conceptual similarities between Wikicompany and CrunchBase. In a sense, a quadrant of orthogonality is what immediately came to mind re. Wikicompany, CrunchBase, Bengee's RDFization efforts, and ours.

Bengee created an RDF based Linked Data warehouse based on the data exposed by your API, which is exposed via the Semantic CrunchBase data space. In our case we've taken the "RDFization on the fly" approach which produces a transient Linked Data View of the CrunchBase data exposed by your APIs. Our approach is in line with our world view: all resources on the Web are data sources, and the Linked Data Web is about incorporating HTTP into the naming scheme of these data sources so that the conventional URL based hyperlinking mechanism can be used to access a structured description of a resource, which is then transmitted using a range negotiable representation formats. In addition, based on the fact that we house and publish a lot of Linked Data on the Web (e.g. DBpedia, PingTheSemanticWeb, and others), we've also automatically meshed Crunchbase data with related data in DBpedia and Wikicompany data.

CrunchBase: Do you know of any apps that are using CrunchBase Cartridge to enhance their functionality?

Me: Yes, the OpenLink Data Explorer which provides CrunchBase site visitors with the option to explore the Linked Data in the CrunchBase data space. It also allows them to "Mesh" (rather than "Mash") CrunchBase data with other Linked Data sources on the Web without writing a single line of code.

CrunchBase: You have been immersed in the Semantic Web movement for a while now. How did you first get interested in the Semantic Web?

Me: We saw the Semantic Web as a vehicle for standardizing conceptual views of heterogeneous data sources via context lenses (URIs). In 1998 as part of our strategy to expand our business beyond the development and deployment of ODBC, JDBC, and OLE-DB data providers, we decided to build a Virtual Database Engine (see: Virtuoso History), and in doing so we sought a standards based mechanism for the conceptual output of the data virtualization effort. As of the time of the seminal unveiling of the Semantic Web in 1998 we were clear about two things, in relation to the effects of the Web and Internet data management infrastructure inflections: 1) Existing DBMS technology had reached it limits 2) Web Servers would ultimately hit their functional limits. These fundamental realities compelled us to develop Virtuoso with an eye to leveraging the Semantic Web as a vehicle from completing its technical roadmap.

CrunchBase: Can you put into layman’s terms exactly what RDF and SPARQL are and why they are important? Do they only matter for developers or will they extend past developers at some point and be used by website visitors as well?

Me: RDF (Resource Description Framework) is a Graph based Data Model that facilitates resource description using the Subject, Predicate, and Object principle. Associated with the core data model, as part of the overall framework, are a number of markup languages for expressing your descriptions (just as you express presentation markup semantics in HTML or document structure semantics in XML) that include: RDFa (simple extension of HTML markup for embedding descriptions of things in a page), N3 (a human friendly markup for describing resources), RDF/XML (a machine friendly markup for describing resources).

SPARQL is the query language associated with the RDF Data Model, just as SQL is a query language associated with the Relational Database Model. Thus, when you have RDF based structured and linked data on the Web, you can query against Web using SPARQL just as you would against an Oracle/SQL Server/DB2/Informix/Ingres/MySQL/etc.. DBMS using SQL. That's it in a nutshell.

CrunchBase: On your website you wrote that “RDF and SPARQL as productivity boosters in everyday web development”. Can you elaborate on why you believe that to be true?

Me: I think the ability to discern a formal description of anything via its discrete properties is of immense value re. productivity, especially when the capability in question results in a graph of Linked Data that isn't confined to a specific host operating system, database engine, application or service, programming language, or development framework. RDF Linked Data is about infrastructure for the true materialization of the "Information at Your Fingertips" vision of yore. Even though it's taken the emergence of RDF Linked Data to make the aforementioned vision tractable, the comprehension of the vision's intrinsic value have been clear for a very long time. Most organizations and/or individuals are quite familiar with the adage: Knowledge is Power, well there isn't any knowledge without accessible Information, and there isn't any accessible Information without accessible Data. The Web has always be grounded in accessibility to data (albeit via compound container documents called Web Pages).

Bottom line, RDF based Linked Data is about Open Data access by reference using URIs (HTTP based Entity IDs / Data Object IDs / Data Source Names), and as I said earlier, the intrinsic value is pretty obvious bearing in mind the costs associated with integrating disparate and heterogeneous data sources -- across intranets, extranets, and the Internet.

CrunchBase: In his definition of Web 3.0, Nova Spivack proposes that the Semantic Web, or Semantic Web technologies, will be force behind much of the innovation that will occur during Web 3.0. Do you agree with Nova Spivack? What role, if any, do you feel the Semantic Web will play in Web 3.0?

Me: I agree with Nova. But I see Web 3.0 as a phase within the Semantic Web innovation continuum. Web 3.0 exists because Web 2.0 exists. Both of these Web versions express usage and technology focus patterns. Web 2.0 is about the use of Open Source technologies to fashion Web Services that are ultimately used to drive proprietary Software as Service (SaaS) style solutions. Web 3.0 is about the use of "Smart Data Access" to fashion a new generation of Linked Data aware Web Services and solutions that exploit the federated nature of the Web to maximum effect; proprietary branding will simply be conveyed via quality of data (cleanliness, context fidelity, and comprehension of privacy) exposed by URIs.

Here are some examples of the CrunchBase Linked Data Space, as projected via our CruncBase Sponger Cartridge:

1. Amazon.com
2. Microsoft
3. Google
4. Apple

My contribution to the developing discourse takes the form of a Q&A session. I've taken the questions posed and provided answers that express my particular points of view:

Q: Is the desktop of the future going to just be a web-hosted version of the same old-fashioned desktop metaphors we have today?

A: No, it's going to be a more Web Architecture aware and compliant variant exposed by appropriate metaphors.

Q: The desktop of the future is going to be a hosted web service

A: A vessel for exploiting the virtues of the Linked Data Web.

Q: The Browser is Going to Swallow Up the Desktop

A: Literally, of course not! Metaphorically, of course! And then the Browser metaphor will decomposes into function specific bits of Web interaction amenable to orchestration by its users.

Q: The focus of the desktop will shift from information to attention

A: No! Knowledge, Information, and Data sharing courtesy of Hyperdata & Hypertext Linking.

Q: Users are going to shift from acting as librarians to acting as daytraders

A: They were Librarians at Web 1.0, Journalist at Web 2.0, and Analysts in Web 3.0 (i.e, analyze structured and interlinked data), and CEOs in Web 4.0 (i.e. get Agents to do stuff intelligently en route to making decisions).

Q: The Webtop will be more social and will leverage and integrate collective intelligence

A: The Linked Data Web vessel will only require you to fill in your profile (once) and then serendipitous discovery and meshing of relevant data will simply happen (the serendipity quotient will grow in line with Linked Data Web density).

Q: The desktop of the future is going to have powerful semantic search and social search capabilities built-in

A: It is going to be able to "Find" rather than "Search" for stuff courtesy of the Linked Data Web.

Q: Interactive shared spaces will replace folders

A: Data Spaces and their URIs (Data Source Names) replace everything. You simply choose the exploration metaphor that best suits you space interaction needs.

Q: The Portable Desktop

A: Ubiquitous Desktop i.e. do the same thing (all answers above) on any device connected to the Web.

Q: The Smart Desktop

A: Vessels with access to Smart Data (Linked Data + Action driven Context sprinklings).

Q: Federated, open policies and permissions

A: More federation for sure, XMPP will become a lot more important, and OAuth will enable resurgence of the federated aspects of the Web and Internet.

Q: The personal cloud

A: Personal Data Spaces plugged into Clouds (Intranet, Extranet, Internet).

Q: The WebOS

A: An operating system endowed with traditional Database and Host Operating system functionality such as: RDF Data Model, SPARQL Query Language, URI based Pointer mechanism, and HTTP based message Bus.

Q: Who is most likely to own the future desktop?

A: You! And all you need is a URI (an ID or Data Source Name for "Entity You") and a Profile Page (a place where "Entity You" is Describe by You).

One Last Thing

You can get a feel for the future desktop by downloading and then installing the OpenLink Data Explorer plugin for Firefox, which allows you to switch viewing modes between Web Page and Linked Data behind the page. :-)

Related

• OpenLink Data Spaces
• Get Yourself a URI in 5 Minutes or Less
• Linked Data Spaces & Data Portability
• Linked Data Conference Keynote (RDFa based remix edition that includes vital bits from TimBL's Linked Data Planet presentation).

The LinqToRdf project is about binding LINQ to RDF. It sits atop Joshua Tauberer's C# based Semantic Web/RDF library which has been out there for a while and works across Microsoft .NET and it's open source variant "Mono".

Historically, the Semantic Web realm has been dominated by RDF frameworks such as Sesame, Jena and Redland; which by their Open Source orientation, predominantly favor non-Windows platforms (Java and Linux). Conversely, Microsoft's .NET frameworks have sought to offer Conceptualization technology for heterogeneous Logical Data Sources via .NET's Entity Frameworks and ADO.NET, but without any actual bindings to RDF.

Interestingly, believe it or not, .NET already has a data query language that shares a number of similarities with SPARQL, called Entity-SQL, and a very innovative programming language called LINQ; that offers a blend of constructs for natural data access and manipulation across relational (SQL), hierarchical (XML), and graph (Object) models without the traditional object language->database impedance tensions of the past.

With regards to all of the above, we've just released a mini white paper that covers the exploitation of RDF-based Linked Data using .NET via LINQ. The paper offers a an overview of LinqToRdf, plus enhancements we've contributed to the project (available in LinqToRdf v0.8.). The paper includes real-world examples that tap into a MusicBrainz powered Linked Data Space, the Music Ontology, the Virtuoso RDF Quad Store, Virtuoso Sponger Middleware, and our RDfization Cartridges for Musicbrainz.

Naturally, we've decided to join the Crunchbase RDFization party, and have just completed a Virtuoso Sponger Cartridge (an RDFizer) for Crouncbase. What we add in our particular cartridge is additional meshing with DBpedia and Wikicompany Linked Data Spaces, plus RDFizaton of the Crunchbase (X)HTML pages :-)

As I've postulated for a while, Linked Data is about data "Meshing" and "Meshups". This isn't a buzzword play. I am pointing out an important distinction between "Mashups" and "Meshpus". Which goes as follows: "Mashups" are about code level joining devoid of structured modelling, hence the revelation of code as opposed to data when you look behind a "Mashup". "Meshups" on the other hand, are about joining disparate structured data sources across the Web. And when you look behind a "Meshup" you see structured data (preferably Linked Data) that enables further "Meshing".

I truly believe that we are now inches away from critical mass re. Linked Data, and because we are dealing with data, the network-effect will be sky-high! I shudder to think about the state of the Linked Data Web in 12 months time. Yes, I am giving the explosion 12 months (or less). These are very exciting times.

Demo Links:

• Opera Software via Benjee's Linked Data Space for Cunchbase
• Opera Software via our Linked Data Space for Crunchbas

For best experience I encourage you to look at the OpenLink Data Explorer extension for Firefox (2.x - 3.x). This enables you to go to Crunchbase (X)HTML pages (and other sites on the Web of course), and then simply use the "View | Linked Data Sources" main or context menu sequence to unveil the Linked Data Sources associated with any Web Page.

Of course there is much more to come!

Anyway, thanks to the Blogosphere, I can attempt to fix this problem myself -- via this post :-)

Q. If you wanted to provide a bewildered but still curious novice a public example of Linked Data at work in their everyday life, what would it be?

Kingsley Idehen: Any one of the following:

My Linking Open Data community Profile Page - the Linked Data integration is exposed via the "Explore Data" Tab My Linked Data Space - viewed via OpenLink's AJAR (Asynchronous Javascript and RDF) based Linked Data Brower My Events Calendar Tag Cloud - a Linked Data view of my Calendar Space using an RDF-aware browser In all cases, you have the ability to explore my data spaces by simply clicking on the links, which on the surface appear to be standard hypertext links, although in reality you are dealing with hyperdata links (i.e., links to entities that result in the generation of entity description pages that expose entity properties via hyperdata links). Thus, you have a single page that describes me in a very rich way since it encompasses all data associated with me, covering: personal profile, blog posts, bookmarks, tag clouds, social networks etc.

Q. What would you show the CEO or CTO of a company outside the tech industry?

Kingsley Idehen: A link to the Entity ALFKI, from the popular Northwind Database associated with Microsoft Access and SQL Server database installations. This particular link exposes a typical enterprise data space (orders, customers, employees, suppliers ...) in a single page. The hyperdata links represent intricate data relationships common to most business systems that will ultimately seek to repurpose existing legacy data sources and SOA services as Linked Data. Alternatively, I would show the same links via the Zitgist Data Viewer (another Linked Data-aware browser). In both cases, I am exploiting direct access to entities via HTTP due to the protocols incorporation into the Data Source Naming scheme.

How Semantic Tagging Works (from a 1000 feet)

When tagging a document, the semantic tagging service passes the content of a target document through a processing pipeline (a distillation process of sorts) that results in automagic extraction of the following:

-- Named Entities

-- Subject matter Entities (Subject matter Concepts reflecting topics covered by the document

Once the extraction phase is completed, a user is presented with a list of "suggested tags" using a variety of user interaction techniques. The literal values of elected Tags are then associated with one or more Tag and Tag Meaning Data Objects, with each Object type endowed with a unique Identifier.

Issues to Note

Broad acceptance that: "Context is king", is gradually taking shape. That said, "Context" landlocked within Literal values offers little over what we have right now (e.g. at Del.icio.us or Technorati), long term. By this I mean: if the end product of semantically enhanced tagging leaves us with: Literal Tag values only, Tags associated with Tag Data Objects endowed with platform specific Identifiers, or Tag Data Objects with any other Identity scheme that excludes HTTP, the ability of Web users to discern or derive multiple perspectives from the base Context (exposed by semantically enhanced Tags) will be lost, or severely impeded at best.

The shape, form, and quality of the lookup substrate that underlies semantic tagging services, ultimately affects "context fidelity" matters such as Entity Disambiguation. The importance of quality lookup infrastructure on the burgeoning Linked Data Web is the reason why OpenLink Software is intimately involved with the DBpedia and UMBEL projects.

Conclusions

I am immensely happy to see that the Web 2.0 and Semantic Web communities are beginning to coalesce around the issue of "Context". This was the case at the WWW2008 Linked Data Workshop, I am feeling a similar vibe emerging from the Semantic Web Technologies conference currently nearing completion in San Jose. Of course, I will be talking about, and demonstrating practical utility of all of this, at the upcoming Linked Data Planet conference.

Related

My Data Space Tag Cloud (*a Linked Data Space*)

Faviki (note: this service needs to expose Linked Data compliant Tag URIs)

MOAT Ontology

Ivan's presentation titled: State of the Semantic Web, is a must view for those who need a quick update on where things are re. the Semantic Web in general.

I also liked the fact that in proper "Lead by example" manner, his presentation isn't PDF or PPT based, it's a Web Document :-)

Hint: as per usual, this post contains a Linked Data demo nugget. This time around, it's in the form of a shared calendar covering a large number of Semantic Web Technology events. All I had to do was subscribe to a number of WebDAV accessible iCal files from my Calendar Data Space and the platform did the rest i.e. produce Linked Data Objects for events associated with a plethora of conferences.

If you assimilate Ivan's presentation properly, you will note I've just generated, and shared, a large number of URIs covering a range of conference events. Thus, you can extend my contributions (thereby enriching the GGG) by simply associating additional data from your Linked Data Space with mine. All you have to do is use my calendar data objects URIs in your statements.

Here is the list:

1. Linked Data Deployment (Daniel Lewis, OpenLink Software)
2. The Programmes Ontology (Tom Scott, BBC and all)
3. SemWebbing the London Gazette (Jeni Tennison, The Stationery Office)
4. Searching, publishing and remixing a Web of Semantic Data (Richard Cyganiak, DERI Galway)
5. Building a Semantic Web Search Engine: Challenges and Solutions (Aidan Hogan, DERI Galway)
6. 'That's not what you said yesterday!' - evolving your Web API (Ian Davis, Talis)
7. Representing, indexing and mining scientific data using XML and RDF: Golem and CrystalEye (Andrew Walkingshaw, University of Cambridge)

For the time challenged (i.e. those unable to view this post using it's permalink / URI as a data source via the OpenLink RDF Browser, Zitgist Data Viewer, DISCO Hyperdata Browser, or Tabulator), the benefits of this post are as follows:

• automatic URI generation for all linked items in this post
• automatic propagation of tags to del.icio.us, Technorati, and PingTheSemanticWeb
• automatic association of formal meanings to my Tags using the MOAT Ontology
• automatic collation and generation of statistical data about my tags using the SCOT Ontology (*missing link is a callout to SCOT Tag Ontology folks to sort the project's home page URL at the very least*)
• explicit typing of my Tags as SKOS Concepts.

Put differently, I cost-effectively contribute to the GGG across all Web interaction dimensions (1.0, 2.0, 3.0) :-)

- Produce RDF Linked Data from non RDF Data Sources (Heterogeneous SQL, XML, Web Services)

- Provide highly scalable RDF Data Management via a Quad Store (DBpedia is an example of a live demonstration)

- Sophisticated Deployment of Linked Data that exploits the power of SPARQL

- Powerful WebDAV innovations that simplify read-write mode interaction with Linked Data

- Use Web Data Virtualization to address the pain and frustration associated with Web Data Silos (e.g. OpenLink Data Spaces layer stop Virtuoso that delivers Personal Data Spaces / Unified Storage in the Clouds)

- Deliver a Linked Data development and deployment platform to .NET (VB, C#) , Java, PHP, Ruby, Perl, Python, 'C', C++, and other developers

- More...

Daniel simplifies my post by using diagrams to depict the different paths for PHP based applications exposing Linked Data - especially those that already provide a significant amount of the content that drives Web 2.0.

If all the content in Web 2.0 information resources are distillable into discrete data objects endowed with HTTP based IDs (URIs), with zero "RDF handcrafting Tax", what do we end up with? A Giant Global Graph of Linked Data; the Web as a Database.

So, what used to apply exclusively, within enterprise settings re. Oracle, DB2, Informix, Ingres, Sybase, Microsoft SQL Server, MySQL, PostrgeSQL, Progress Open Edge, Firebird, and others, now applies to the Web. The Web becomes the "Distributed Database Bus" that connects database records across disparate databases (or Data Spaces). These databases manage and expose records that are remotely accessible "by reference" via HTTP.

As I've stated at every opportunity in the past, Web 2.0 is the greatest thing that every happened to the Semantic Web vision :-) Without the "Web 2.0 Data Silo Conundrum" we wouldn't have the cry for "Data Portability" that brings a lot of clarity to some fundamental Web 2.0 limitations that end-users ultimately find unacceptable.

In the late '80s, the SQL Access Group (now part of X/Open) addressed a similar problem with RDBMS silos within the enterprise that lead to the SAG CLI which is exists today as Open Database Connectivity.

In a sense we now have WODBC (Web Open Database Connectivity), comprised of Web Services based CLIs and/or traditional back-end DBMS CLIs (ODBC, JDBC, ADO.NET, OLE-DB, or Native), Query Language (SPARQL Query Language), and a Wire Protocol (HTTP based SPARQL Protocol) delivering Web infrastructure equivalents of SQL and RDA, but much better, and with much broader scope for delivering profound value due to the Web's inherent openness. Today's PHP, Python, Ruby, Tcl, Perl, ASP.NET developer is the enterprise 4GL developer of yore, without enterprise confinement. We could even be talking about 5GL development once the Linked Data interaction is meshed with dynamic languages (delivering higher levels of abstraction at the language and data interaction levels). Even the underlying schemas and basic design will evolve from Closed World (solely) to a mesh of Closed & Open World view schemas.

-- identifying the things you observe, or stumble upon, using URIs (aka Entity IDs)

-- construct URIs using HTTP so that the Web provides a channel for referencing things elsewhere (remote object referencing)

-- Expose things in your Data Space(s) that are potentially useful to other Web users via URIs

-- Link to other Web accessible things using their URIs.

The list is nice, but actual execution can be challenging. For instance, when writing a blog post, or constructing a WikiWord, would you have enough disposable time to go searching for these URIs? Or would you compromise and continue to inject "Literal" values into the Web, leaving it to the reasoning endowed human reader to connect the dots?

Anyway, OpenLink Data Spaces is now equipped with a Glossary system that allows me to manage terms, meaning of terms, and hyper-linking of phrases and words matching associated with my terms. The great thing about all of this is that everything I do is scoped to my Data Space (my universe of discourse), I don't break or impede the other meanings of these terms outside my Data Space. The Glossary system can be shared with anyone I choose to share it with, and even better, it makes my upstreaming (rules based replication) style of blogging even more productive :-)

Remember, on the Linked Data Web, who you know doesn't matter as much as what your are connected to, directly or indirectly. Jason Kolb covers this issue in his post: People as Data Connectors, and so doesFrederick Giasson via a recent post titled: Networks are everywhere. For instance, this blog post (or the entire Blog) is a bona fide RDF Linked Data Source, you can use it as the Data Source of a SPARQL Query to find things that aren't even mentioned in this post, since all you are doing is beaming a query through my Data Space (a container of Linked Data Graphs). On that note, let's re-watch Jon Udell's "On-Demand-Blogosphere" screencast from 2006 :-)

ReadWriteWeb via Alex Iskold's post have delivered another iteration of their "Guide to Semantic Technologies".

If you look at the title of this post (and their article) they seem to be accurately providing a guide to Semantic Technologies, so no qualms there. If on the other hand, this is supposed to he a guide to the "Semantic Web" as prescribed by TimBL then they are completely missing the essence of the whole subject, and demonstrably so I may add, since the entities: "ReadWriteWeb" and "Alex Iskold" are only describable today via the attributes of the documents they publish i.e their respective blogs and hosted blog posts.

Preoccupation with Literal objects as describe above, implies we can only take what "ReadWriteWeb" and "Alex Iskold" say "Literally" (grep, regex, and XPath/Xquery are the only tools for searching deeper in this Literal realm), we have no sense of what makes them tick or where they come from, no history (bar "About Page" blurb), no data connections beyond anchored text (more pointers to opaque data sources) in post and blogrolls. The only connection between this post and them is the my deliberate use of the same literal text in the Title of this post.

TimBL's vision as espoused via the "Semantic Web" vision is about the production, consumption, and sharing of Data Objects via HTTP based Identifiers called URIs/IRIs (Hyperdata Links / Linked Data). It's how we use the Web as a Distributed Database where (as Jim Hendler once stated with immense clarity): I can point to records (entity instances) in your database (aka Data Space) from mine. Which is to say that if we can all point to data entities/objects (not just data entities of type "Document") using these Location, Value, and Structure independent Object Identifiers (courtesy of HTTP) we end up with a much more powerful Web, and one that is closer to the "Federated and Open" nature of the Web.

As I stated in a prior post, if you or your platform of choice aren't producing de-referencable URIs for your data objects, you may be Semantic (this data model predates the Web), but there is no "World Wide Web" in what you are doing.

What are the Benefits of the Semantic Web?

Consumer - "Discovery of relevant things" and be being "Discovered by relevant things" (people, places, events, and other things)

Enterprise - ditto plus the addition of enterprise domain specific things such as market opportunities, product portfolios, human resources, partners, customers, competitors, co-opetitors, acquisition targets, new regulation etc..)

Simple demo:

I am a Kingsley Idehen, a Person who authors this weblog. I also share bookmarks gathered over the years across an array of subjects via my bookmark data space. I also subscribe to a number of RSS/Atom/RDF feeds, which I share via my feeds subscription data space. Of course, all of these data sources have Tags which are collectively exposed via my weblog tag-cloud, feeds subscriptions tag-cloud, and bookmarks tag-cloud data spaces.

As I don't like repeating myself, and I hate wasting my time or the time of others, I simply share my Data Space (a collection of all of my purpose specific data spaces) via the Web so that others (friends, family, employees, partners, customers, project collaborators, competitors, co-opetitors etc.) can can intentionally or serendipitously discover relevant data en route to creating new information (perspectives) that is hopefully exposed others via the Web.

Bottom-line, the Semantic Web is about adding the missing "Open Data Access & Connectivity" feature to the current Document Web (we have to beyond regex, grep, xpath, xquery, full text search, and other literal scrapping approaches). The Linked Data Web of de-referencable data object URIs is the critical foundation layer that makes this feasible.

Remember, It's not about "Applications" it's about Data and actually freeing Data from the "tyranny of Applications". Unfortunately, application inadvertently always create silos (esp. on the Web) since entity data modeling, open data access, and other database technology realm matters, remain of secondary interest to many application developers.

Final comment, RDF facilitates Linked Data on the Web, but all RDF isn't endowed with de-referencable URIs (a major source of confusion and misunderstanding). Thus, you can have RDF Data Source Providers that simply project RDF data silos via Web Services APIs if RDF output emanating from a Web Service doesn't provide out-bound pathways to other data via de-referencable URIs. Of course the same also applies to Widgets that present you with all the things they've discovered without exposing de-referencable URIs for each item.

BTW - my final comments above aren't in anyway incongruent with devising successful business models for the Web. As you may or may not know, OpenLink is not only a major platform provider for the Semantic Web (expressed in our UDA, Virtuoso, OpenLink Data Spaces, and OAT products), we are also actively seeding Semantic Web (tribe: Linked Data of course) startups. For instance, Zitgist, which now has Mike Bergman as it's CEO alongside Frederick Giasson as CTO. Of course, I cannot do Zitgist justice via a footnote in a blog post, so I will expand further in a separate post.

Additional information about this blog post:

1. I didn't spent hours looking for URIs used in my hyperlinks
2. The post is best viewed via an RDF Linked Data aware user agents (OpenLink RDF Browser, Zitgist Data Viewer, DISCO Hyperdata Browser, Tabulator).

If you look at the title of this post (and their article) they seem to be accurately providing a guide to Semantic Technologies, so no qualms there. If on the other hand, this is supposed to he a guide to the "Semantic Web" as prescribed by TimBL then they are completely missing the essence of the whole subject, and demonstrably so I may add, since the entities: "ReadWriteWeb" and "Alex Iskold" are only describable today via the attributes of the documents they publish i.e their respective blogs and hosted blog posts.

Preoccupation with Literal objects as describe above, implies we can only take what "ReadWriteWeb" and "Alex Iskold" say "Literally" (grep, regex, and XPath/Xquery are the only tools for searching deeper in this Literal realm), we have no sense of what makes them tick or where they come from, no history (bar "About Page" blurb), no data connections beyond anchored text (more pointers to opaque data sources) in post and blogrolls. The only connection between this post and them is the my deliberate use of the same literal text in the Title of this post.

TimBL's vision as espoused via the "Semantic Web" vision is about the production, consumption, and sharing of Data Objects via HTTP based Identifiers called URIs/IRIs (Hyperdata Links / Linked Data). It's how we use the Web as a Distributed Database where (as Jim Hendler once stated with immense clarity): I can point to records (entity instances) in your database (aka Data Space) from mine. Which is to say that if we can all point to data entities/objects (not just data entities of type "Document") using these Location, Value, and Structure independent Object Identifiers (courtesy of HTTP) we end up with a much more powerful Web, and one that is closer to the "Federated and Open" nature of the Web.

As I stated in a prior post, if you or your platform of choice aren't producing de-referencable URIs for your data objects, you may be Semantic (this data model predates the Web), but there is no "World Wide Web" in what you are doing.

What are the Benefits of the Semantic Web?

Consumer - "Discovery of relevant things" and be being "Discovered by relevant things" (people, places, events, and other things)

Enterprise - ditto plus the addition of enterprise domain specific things such as market opportunities, product portfolios, human resources, partners, customers, competitors, co-opetitors, acquisition targets, new regulation etc..)

Simple demo:

I am a Kingsley Idehen, a Person who authors this weblog. I also share bookmarks gathered over the years across an array of subjects via my bookmark data space. I also subscribe to a number of RSS/Atom/RDF feeds, which I share via my feeds subscription data space. Of course, all of these data sources have Tags which are collectively exposed via my weblog tag-cloud, feeds subscriptions tag-cloud, and bookmarks tag-cloud data spaces.

As I don't like repeating myself, and I hate wasting my time or the time of others, I simply share my Data Space (a collection of all of my purpose specific data spaces) via the Web so that others (friends, family, employees, partners, customers, project collaborators, competitors, co-opetitors etc.) can can intentionally or serendipitously discover relevant data en route to creating new information (perspectives) that is hopefully exposed others via the Web.

Bottom-line, the Semantic Web is about adding the missing "Open Data Access & Connectivity" feature to the current Document Web (we have to beyond regex, grep, xpath, xquery, full text search, and other literal scrapping approaches). The Linked Data Web of de-referencable data object URIs is the critical foundation layer that makes this feasible.

Remember, It's not about "Applications" it's about Data and actually freeing Data from the "tyranny of Applications". Unfortunately, application inadvertently always create silos (esp. on the Web) since entity data modeling, open data access, and other database technology realm matters, remain of secondary interest to many application developers.

Final comment, RDF facilitates Linked Data on the Web, but all RDF isn't endowed with de-referencable URIs (a major source of confusion and misunderstanding). Thus, you can have RDF Data Source Providers that simply project RDF data silos via Web Services APIs if RDF output emanating from a Web Service doesn't provide out-bound pathways to other data via de-referencable URIs. Of course the same also applies to Widgets that present you with all the things they've discovered without exposing de-referencable URIs for each item.

BTW - my final comments above aren't in anyway incongruent with devising successful business models for the Web. As you may or may not know, OpenLink is not only a major platform provider for the Semantic Web (expressed in our UDA, Virtuoso, OpenLink Data Spaces, and OAT products), we are also actively seeding Semantic Web (tribe: Linked Data of course) startups. For instance, Zitgist, which now has Mike Bergman as it's CEO alongside Frederick Giasson as CTO. Of course, I cannot do Zitgist justice via a footnote in a blog post, so I will expand further in a separate post.

Additional information about this blog post:

1. I didn't spent hours looking for URIs used in my hyperlinks
2. The post is best viewed via an RDF Linked Data aware user agents (OpenLink RDF Browser, Zitgist Data Viewer, DISCO Hyperdata Browser, Tabulator).

The aforementioned qualification is increasingly necessary for the following reasons:

1. The Semantic Web vision is broad and comprised of many layers
2. A new era of confusion is taking shape just as we thought we had quelled the prior AI dominated realm of confusion
3. None of the Semantic Web vision layers are comprehensible in practical ways without a basic foundation
4. Open Data Access is the foundation of the Semantic Web (in prior post I used the term: Semantic Web Layer 1)
5. URIs units of Open Data Access in Semantic Web parlance i.e.. each datum on the Web must have an ID (minted by the host Data Space).

The terms GGG, Linked Data, Data Web, Web of Data, and Web 3.0 (when I use this term) all imply URI driven Open Data Access for the Web Database (maybe call this ODBC for the Web) -- ability to point to records across data spaces without any adverse effect to the remote data spaces. It's really important to note that none of the aforementioned terms have nothing to do with the "Linguistic Meaning of blurb". Building a smarter document exposed via a URL without exposing descriptive data links doesn't provide open access to information data sources.

As human beings we are all endowed with reasoning capability. But we can't reason without access to data. Dearth of openly accessible structured data is the source of many ills in cyberspace and across society in general. Today we still have Subjectivity reigning over Objectivity due to the prohibitive costs of open data access.

We can't cost-effectively pursue objectivity without cost-effective infrastructure for creating alternative views of the data behind information sources (e.g. Web Pages). More Objectivity and less Subjectivity is what the next Web Frontier is about. At OpenLink we simply use the moniker: Analysis for All! Everyone becomes a data analyst in some form, and even better, the analysis are easily accessible to anyone connected to the Web. Of course, you will be able to share special analysis with your private network of friends and family, or if you so choose, not at all :-)

Recap, it's important to note that Linked Data is the foundation layer of the Semantic Web vision. It's not only facilitates open data access, it also enables data integration (Meshing as opposed to Mashing) across disparate data schemas

As demonstrated by DBpedia and the Linked Data Solar system emerging around it, if you URI everything, then everything is Cool.

Linked Data and Information Silos are mutually exclusive concepts. Thus, you cannot produce a web accessible Information Silo and then refer to it as "Semantic Web" technology. Of course, it might be very Semantic, but it's fundamentally devoid of critical "Semantic Web" essence (DNA).

My acid test for any Semantic Web solution is simply this (using a Web User Agent or Client):

1. go to the profile page of the service
2. ask for an RDF representation of my profile (by this I mean "get me the raw data in structured form")
3. attempt to traverse the structured data graph (RDF) that the service provides via live de-referncable URIs.

Here is the Acid test against my Data Space:

1. My Profile Page (HTML representation dispatched via an instance of OpenLink Data Spaces)
2. Click on the "Linked Data Tab" (HTML representation endowed with Data Links the link to information resources containing other structured descriptions of things).

*On* the ubiquitous Web of "Linked Documents", HREF means (by definition and usage): Hypertext Reference to an HTTP accessible Data Object of Type: "Document" (an information resource). Of course we don't make the formal connection of Object Type when dealing with the Web on a daily basis, but whenever you encounter the "resource not found" condition notice the message: HTTP/1.0 404 Object Not Found, from the HTTP Server tasked with retrieving and returning the resource.

*In* the Web of "Linked Data", a complimentary addition to the current Web of "Linked Documents", HREF is used to reference Data Objects that are of a variety of "Types", not just "Documents". And the way this is achieved, is by using Data Object Identifiers (URIs / IRIs that are generated by the Linked Data deployment platform) in the strict sense i.e. Data Identity (URI) is separated from Data Address (URL). Thus, you can reference a Person Data Object (aka an instance of a Person Class) in your HREF and the HTTP Server returns a Description of the Data Object via a Document (again, an information resource). A document containing the Description of a Data Object typically contains HREFs to other Data Objects that expose the Attributes and Relationships of the initial Person Data Object, and it this collection of Data Objects that is technically called a "Graph" -- which is what RDF models.

What I describe above is basic stuff for anyone that's familiar with Object Database or Distributed Objects technology and concepts.

URI and URL confusion

The Linked Document Web is a collection of physical resources that traverse the Web Information Bus in palatable format i.e documents. Thus, Document Object Identity and Document Object Data Address can be the same thing i.e. a URL can serve as the ID/URI of a Document Data Object.

The Linked Data Web on the other hand, is a Distributed Object Database, and each Data Object must be uniquely defined, otherwise we introduce ambiguity that ultimately taints the Database itself (making incomprehensible to reasoning challenged machines). Thus we must have unique Object IDs (URIs / IRIs) for People, Places, Events, and other things that aren't Documents. Once we follow the time tested rules of Identity, People can then be associated with the things they create (blog posts, web pages, bookmarks, wikiwords etc). RDF is about expressing these graph model relationships while RDF serialization formats enables the information resources to transport these data object link ladden information resources to requesting User Agents.

Put in more succinct terms, all documents on the Web are compound documents in reality (e.g. mast contain a least an image these days). The Linked Data Web is about a Web where Data Object IDs (URIs) enable us to distill source data from the information contained in a compound document.

Examples:

1. <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2#this> - the ID (URI minted from URL via addition of #this) of a Data Object of Type Person that Identifies me. The Person definition I use comes from the FOAF vocabulary/schema/ontology/data dictionary
2. <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2> - the URI (also a URL) of a FOAF file that contains a description of the Data Object ID: <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2#this> (me)
3. As an information resource <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2> can be dispatched from an HTTP server to a User Agent in (X)HTML, RDF/XML, N3/Turtle representations via HTTP Content Negotiation (note: Look at the "Linked Data" tab to see one example of what Data Links facilitate re. Data Discovery and Exploration)
4. If I choose an Object ID of <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2/this> instead of <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2#this> then the HTTP Server should not return an information resource (i.e provide 200 OK response) when a User Agent requests a resource via HTTP using the URI: <http://community.linkeddata.org/dataspace/person/kidehen2/this>, because a Data Object ID (URI) and the Data Object Address (URL) cannot be the same when my Data Object isn't of Type Document; the sever has to use response code 303 to redirect the user agent to the URL of an information resource that matches the Content-type designated in the HTTP Request or determine representation based on it's own quality of service rules for the information resource associated with the Object ID (URI).

The degree of unobtrusiveness of new technology, concepts, or new applications of existing technology, is what ultimately determines eventual uptake and meme virulence (network effects). For a while, the Semantic Web meme was mired in confusion and general misunderstanding due to a shortage of practical use case scenario demos.

The emergence of the SPARQL Query Language has provided critical infrastructure for a number of products, projects, and demos, that now make the utility of the Semantic Web vision mush clearly via the simplicity of Linked Data, as exemplified by the following:

1. Linking Open Data Community - collection of People and Linked Data Spaces (across a variety of domains)
2. DBpedia - Ground zero for experiencing and comprehending Linked Data
3. OpenLink Data Spaces - a simple solution for creating Linked Data Web presence via from existing Web Data Sources (Blogs, Wikis, Shared Bookmarks, Tag Spaces, Web Sites, Social Networking Services, Web Services, Discussion Forums etc..)
4. OpenLink Virtuoso - a Universal Server for generating, managing, and deploying RDF Linked Data from SQL, XML, Web Services based data sources

Related

Ryan Tomayko's post titled: So, What Does "HREF" Stand For, Anyway

Elias Torre's post titled: The Web FTW

Cool URIs for the Semantic Web.

Now I can simply state the following using Linked Data (hyperdata) links:

1. Universal Data Access Drivers Suite (UDA) for ODBC, JDBC, ADO.NET, OLE-DB, and XMLA
2. OpenLink Data Spaces
3. Virtuoso

We no longer have to explain (repeatedly) why our drivers exist in Express, Lite, and Multi-Tier Edition formats, or why you ultimately need Multi-Tier Drivers over Single Tier Drivers (Express or Lite Editions) since you ultimately heed high-performance, data encryption, and policy based security across each of the data access driver formats.

A while back, I wrote a post titled:Why we need Linked Data. The aim of the post was to bring attention to the implications of exponential growth of User Generated Content (typically, semi-structured and unstructured data) on the Web. The growth in question is occurring within a fixed data & information processing timeframe (i.e. there will always be 24hrs in a day), which sets the stage for Information Overload as expressed in a recent post from ReadWriteWeb titled: Visualizing Social Media Fatigue.

The emerging "Web of Linked Data" augments the current "Web of Linked Documents", by providing a structured data corpus partitioned by containers I prefer to call: Data Spaces. These spaces enable Linked Data aware solutions to deliver immense value such as, complex data graph traversal, starting from document beachheads, that expose relevant data within a faction of the time it would take to achieve the same thing using traditional document web methods such as full text search patterns, scraping, and mashing etc.

Remember, our DNA based data & information system far exceeds that of any inorganic system when it comes to reasoning, but it remains immensely incapable of accurately and efficiently processing huge volumes of data & information -- irrespective of data model.

The Idea behind the Semantic Web has always been about an evolution of the Web into a structured data collective comprised of interlinked Data items and Data Containers (Data Spaces). Of course we can argue forever about the Semantics of the solution (ironically), but we can't shirk away from the impending challenges that "Information Overload" is about to unleash on our limited processing time and capabilities.

For those looking for a so called "killer application" for the Semantic Web, I would urge you to align this quest with the "Killer Problem" of our times, because when you do so you will that all routes lead to: Linked Data that leverages existing Web Architecture.

Once you understand the problem, you will hopefully understand that we all need some kind of "Data Junction Box" that provides a "Data Access Focal Point" for all of the data we splatter across the net as we sign up for the next greatest and latest Web X.X hosted service, or as we work on a daily basis with a variety of tools within enterprise Intranets.

BTW - these "Data Junction Boxes" will also need to be unobtrusively bound to our individual Identities.

Jason recently moved to Massachusetts which lead to me pinging him about our earlier blogosphere encounter and the emergence of a Data Portability Community. I also informed him about the fact that TimBL, myself, and a number of other Semantic Web technology enthusiasts, frequently meet on the 2nd Tuesday of each month at the MIT hosted Cambridge Semantic Web Gatherings, to discuss, demonstrate, debate all aspects of the Semantic Web. Luckily (for both of us), Jason attended the last event, and we got to meet each other in person.

Following our face to face meeting in Cambridge, a number of follow-on conversations ensued covering, Linked Data and practical applications of the Semantic Web vision. Jason writes about our exchanges a recent post titled: The Semantic Web. His passion for Data Portability enabled me to use OpenID and FOAF integration to connect the Semantic Web and Data Portability via the Linked Data concept.

During our conversations, Jason also eluded to the fact that he had already encountered OpenLink Software while working with our ODBC Drivers (part of or UDA product family) for IBM Informix (Single-Tier or Multi-Tier Editions) a few years ago (interesting random connection).

As I've stated in the past, I've always felt that the Semantic Web vision will materialize by way of a global epiphany. The count down to this inevitable event started at the birth of the blogosphere, ironically. And accelerated more recently, through the emergence of Web 2.0 and Social Networking, even more ironically :-)

The blogosphere started the process of Data Space coalescence via RSS/Atom based semi-strucutured data enclaves, Web 2.0 RDFpropagated Web Service usage en route to creating service provider controlled, data and information silosRDF, Social NetworkingRDF brought attention to the fact that User Generated Data wasn't actually owned or controlled by the Data Creators etc.

The emergence of "Data Portability" has created a palatable moniker for a clearly defined, and slightly easier to understand, problem: the meshing of Data and Identity in cyberspace i.e. individual points of presence in cyberspace, in the form of "Personal Data Spaces in the Clouds" (think: doing really powerful stuff with .name domains). In a sense, this is the critical inflection point between the document centric "Web of Linked Documents" and the data centric "Web or Linked Data". There is absolutely no other way solve this problem in a manner that alleviates the imminent challenges presented by information overload -- resulting from the exponential growth of user generated data across the Internet and enterprise Intranets.

What is SPARQL?

A query language for the burgeoning Structured & Linked Data Web (aka Semantic Web / Giant Global Graph). Like SQL, for the Relational Data Model, it provides a query language for the Graph based RDF Data Model.

It's also a REST or SOAP based Web Service that exposes SPARQL access to RDF Data via an endpoint.

In addition, it's also a Query Results Serialization format that includes XML and JSON support.

Why is it Important?

It brings important clarity to the notion of the "Web as a Database" by transforming existing Web Sites, Portals, and Web Services into bona fide corpus of Mesh-able (rather than Mash-able) Data Sources. For instance, you can perform queries that join one or more of the aforementioned data sources in exactly the same manner (albeit different syntax) as you would one or more SQL Tables.

Example:

-- SPARQL equivalent of SQL SELECT * against my personal data space hosted FOAF file

SELECT DISTINCT ?s ?p ?o
FROM <http://myopenlink.net/dataspace/person/kidehen> 
WHERE {?s ?p ?o}

-- SPARQL against my social network -- Note: My SPARQL will be beamed across all of contacts in the social networks of my contacts as long as they are all HTTP URI based within each data space

PREFIX foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/>
SELECT DISTINCT ?Person
FROM <http://myopenlink.net/dataspace/person/kidehen>
WHERE {?s a foaf:Person; foaf:knows ?Person}

Note: you can use the basic SPARQL Endpoint, SPARQL Query By Example, or SPARQL Query Builder Demo tool to experiment with the demonstration queries above.

How Do I use It?

SPARQL is implemented by RDF Data Management Systems (Triple or Quad Stores) just as SQL is implemented by Relational Database Management Systems. The aforementioned data management systems will typically expose SPARQL access via a SPARQL endpoint.

Where are it's implementations?

A SPARQL implementors Testimonial page accompanies the SPARQL press release. In addition the is a growing collection of implementations on the ESW Wiki Page for SPARQL compliant RDF Triple & Quad Stores.

Is this really a big deal?

Yes! SPARQL facilitates an unobtrusive manifestation of a Linked Data Web by way of natural extension of the existing Document Web i.e these Web enclaves co-exist in symbiotic fashion.

As DBpedia very clearly demonstrates, Linked Data makes the Semantic Web demonstrable and much easier to comprehend. Without SPARQL there would be no mechanism for Linked Data deployment, and without Linked Data there is no mechanism for Beaming Queries (directly or indirectly) across the Giant Global Graph of data hosted by Social Networks, Shard Bookmarks Services, Weblogs, Wikis, RSS/Atom/OPML feeds, Photo Galleries and other Web accessible Data Sources (Data Spaces).

Related items

Cool URIs

Publishing Linked Data Tutorial

Detailed SPARQL Query Examples using SIOC Data Spaces

Detailed SPARQL Query Examples using FOAF Data Spaces

"The phrase Open Social implies portability of personal and social data. That would be exciting but there are entirely different protocols underway to deal with those ideas. As some people have told me tonight, it may have been more accurate to call this "OpenWidget" - though the press wouldn't have been as good. We've been waiting for data and identity portability - is this all we get?"
[Source: Read/Write Web's Commentary & Analysis of Google's OpenSocial API]

..Perhaps the world will read the terms of use of the API, and realize this is not an open API; this is a free API, owned and controlled by one company only: Google. Hopefully, the world will remember another time when Google offered a free API and then pulled it. Maybe the world will also take a deeper look and realize that the functionality is dependent on Google hosted technology, which has its own terms of service (including adding ads at the discretion of Google), and that building an OpenSocial application ties Google into your application, and Google into every social networking site that buys into the Dream. Hopefully the world will remember. Unlikely, though, as such memories are typically filtered in the Great Noise....

[Source: Poignant commentary excerpt from Shelly Power's Blog (as always)]

The "Semantic Data Web" vision has always been about "Data & Identity" portability across the Web. Its been that and more from day one.

In a nutshell, we continue to exhibit varying degrees of Cognitive Dissonance re the following realities:

1. The Network is the Computer (Internet/Intranet/Extranet depending on your TCP/IP usage scenarios)
2. The Web is the OS (ditto) and it provides a communications subsystem (Information BUS) comprised of
- HTTP Protocol
- URIs (pointer system for identifying, accessing, and manipulating data)
3. HTTP based Interprocess (i.e Web Apps are processes when you discard the HTML UI and interact with the application logic containers called "Web Services" behind the pages) ultimately hit data
4. Web Data is best Modeled as a Graph (RDF, Containers/Items/Item Types, Property & Value Pairs associated with something, and other labels)
5. Network are Graphs and vice versa
6. Social Networks are graphs where nodes are connected via social connectors ( [x]--knows-->[y] )
7. The Web is a Graph that exposes a People and Data Network (to the degree we allude to humans not being data containers i.e. just nodes in a network, otherwise we are talking about a Data Network)
8. Data access and manipulation depends inherently on canonical Data Access mechanisms such as Data Source Identifiers / Names (time-tested practice in various DBMS realms)
9. Data is forever, it is the basis of Information, and it is increasing exponentially due to proliferation of Web Services induced user activities (User Generated Content)
10. Survival, Vitality, Longevity, Efficiency, Productivity etc.. are all depend on our ability to process data effectively in a shrinking time continuum where Data and/or Information overload is the alternative.

The Data Web is about Presence over Eyeballs due to the following realities:

1. Eyeballs are input devices for a DNA based processing system (Humans). The aforementioned processing system can reason very well, but simply cannot effectively process masses of data or information
2. Widgets offer little value long term re. the imminent data and information overload dilemma, ditto Web pages (however pretty), and any other Eyeballs-only centric Web Apps
3. Computers (machines) are equipped with inorganic (non DNA) based processing power, they are equipped to process huge volumes of data and/or information, but they cannot reason
4. To be effective in the emerging frontier comprised of a Network Computer and a Web OS, we need an effective mechanism that makes best use of the capabilities possessed by humans and machines, by shifting the focus to creation and interaction with points of "Data Web Presence" that openly expose "Structured Linked Data".

This is why we need to inject a mesh of Linked Data into the existing Web. This is what the often misunderstood vision of the "Semantic Data Web" or "Web of Data" or "Web or Structured Data" is all about.

As stated earlier (point 10 above), "Data is forever" and there is only more of it to come! Sociality and associated Social Networking oriented solutions are at best a spec in the Web's ocean of data once you comprehend this reality.

Note: I am writing this post as an early implementor of GData and an implementor of RDF Linked Data technology and a "Web Purist".

OpenSocial implementation and support across our relevant product families: Virtuoso (i.e the Sponger Middleware for RDF component), OpenLink Data Spaces (Data Space Controller / Services), and the OpenLink Ajaxt Toolkit (i.e OAT Widgets and Libraries), is a triviality now that the OpenSocial APIs are public.

The concern I have, and the problem that remains mangled in the vast realms of Web Architecture incomprehension, is the fact that GData and GData based APIs cannot deliver Structured Linked Data in line with the essence of the Web without introducing "lock-in" that ultimately compromises the "Open Purity" of the Web. Facebook and Google's OpenSocial response to the Facebook juggernaut (i.e. open variant of the Facebook Activity Dashboard and Social Network functionality realms, primarily), are at best icebergs in the ocean we know as the "World Wide Web". The nice and predictable thing about icebergs is that they ultimately melt into the larger ocean :-)

- RDF Views of SQL Data - Orri Erling on behalf of OpenLink Software

- Computer Science 2.0 (covering User Generated Content Explosion) - Michael Brodie

- Experiences re. solving SPARQL Access to Distributed Data Sources - Phil Ashworth

- Other presentations

* 64-bit Integer Support

* RDF Sink Folders for WebDAV - enabling RDF Quad Store population by simply dropping RDF files into WebDAV or via HTTP (meaning you can use CURL as an RDF in put mechanism for instance)

* Additional Sponger Cartridges from Audio binary files (i.e ID3 tag extraction and Music Ontology mapping which exposes the fine details of music as RDF based Structured Data; one for the DJs & Remixers out there!)

* New Sponger Cartridges for Facebook, Freebase, Wikipedia, GRDDL, RDFa, eRDF and more

* Support for PHP 5.2 runtime hosting (Virtuoso is a bona fide deployment platform for: Wordpress, MediaWiki, phpBB, Drupal etc.)

* Enhanced UI for managing RDF Linked Data deployment (covering Multi Homed domains, Virtual Directories associated with URL-rewrite rules

* Demonstration Database includes SQL-RDF Views & SQL Table samples for the THALIA Web Data Integration benchmark and test-suite

* Tutorial Application includes Linked Data style SQL-RDF Views for the Northwind SQL DBMS schema (which is the same as the standard Virtuoso demo atabase schema)

* SQL-RDF Views implementation of the TPC-D benchmark (Yes, we can run this grueling SQL benchmark via RDF views of SQL Data!)

* A new Amazon EC2 Image for Virtuoso that enables you to instantiate a fully configured instance comprising the Virtuoso core, OpenLink Data Spaces platform and the OpenLink Ajax Toolkit (OAT) (we now have bona fide Data Spaces in the Clouds as an addition to the emerging Semantic Data Web mesh).

Download Lnks:

* Open Source Edition

* Commercial Edition

Well, I'll have a crack at helping him out i.e. defining the Semantic Data Web in simple terms with linked examples :-)

Tip: Watch the recent TimBL video interview re. the Semantic Data Web before, during, or after reading this post.

Here goes!

The popular Web is a "Web of Documents". The Semantic Data Web is a "Web of Data". Going down a level, the popular web connects documents across the web via hyperlinks. The Semantic Data Web connects data on the web via hyperlinks. Next level, hyperlinks on the popular web have no inherent meaning (lack context beyond: "there is another document"). Hyperlinks on the Semantic Data Web have inherent meaning (they possess context: "there is a Book" or "there is a Person" or "this is a piece of Music" etc..).

Very simple example:

Click the traditional web document URLs for Dan Connolly and Tim Berners-Lee. Then attempt to discern how they are connected. Of course you will see some obvious connections by reading the text, but you won't easily discern other data driven connections. Basically, this is no different to reading about either individual in a print journal, bar the ability to click on hyperlinks that open up other pages. The Data Extraction process remains labour intensive :-(

Repeat the exercise using the traditional web document URLs as Data Web URIs, this time around, paste the hyperlinks above into an RDF aware Browser (in this case the OpenLink RDF Browser). Note, we are making a subtle but critical change i.e. the URLs are now being used as Semantic Data Web URIs (a small-big-deal kind of thing).

If you're impatient or simply strapped for time (aren't we all these days), simply take a look at these links:

1. Dan Connolly (DanC) RDF Browser Session permalink
2. Tim Berners-Lee (TimBL) RDF Browser Session permalink
3. TimBL and DanC combined RDF Browser Session permalink

Note: There are other RDF Browsers out there such as:

1. Tabulator
2. DISCO
3. Objectviewer

All of these RDF Browsers (or User Agents) demonstrate the same core concepts in subtly different ways.

If I haven't lost you, proceed to a post I wrote a few weeks ago titled: Hello Data Web (Take 3 - Feel the "RDF" Force).

If you've made it this far, simply head over to DBpedia for a lot of fun :-)

Note Re. my demos: we make use of SVG in our RDF Browser which makes them incompatible with IE (6 or 7) and Safari. That said, Firefox (1.5+), Opera 9.x, WebKit (Open Source Safari), and Camino work fine.

Note to Scoble:

All the Blogs, Wikis, Shared Bookmarks, Image Galleries, Discussion Forums and the like are Semantic Web Data Spaces. The great thing about all of this is that through RSS 2.0's wild popularity, Blogosphere has done what I postulated about a while back: The Semantic Web would be self-annotating, and so it has come to be :-)

To prove the point above: paste your blog's URL into the OpenLink RDF Browser and see it morph into a Semantic Data Web URI (a pointer to Web Data that's you've created) once you click the "Query" button (click on the TimeLine tab for full effect). The same applies to del.icio.us, Flickr, Googlebase, and basically any REST style Web Service as per my RDF Middleware post.

Lazy Semantic Web Callout:

If you're a good animator (pro or hobbyist), please produce an animation of a document going through a shredder. The strips that emerge from the shredder represent the granular data that was once the whole document. The same thing is happening on the Web right now, we are putting photocopies of (X)HTML documents through the shredder (in a good way) en route to producing granular items of data that remain connected to the original copy while developing new and valuable connections to other items of Web Data.

That's it!

Quick Definitions:

Mashups - Brute force joining of disparate Web Data

Meshups - Natural joining of disparate Web Data

Reasons for the distinction:

Mashups are Data Model oblivious.

Meshups are Data Model driven.

Examples:

Mashups are based on RSS 2.0 most of the time (RSS 2.0 is at best a Tree Structure that contains untyped or meaning challenged links.

Meshups are RDF based and the data is self describing since the links are typed (posses inherent meaning thereby providing context).

So what? You may be thinking.

For starters, I can quite easily Mesh data from Googlebase (which emits RSS 2.0 or Atom) and other data sources with the Mapping Services from Yahoo!

I can achieve this in minutes without writing a single line of code. I can do it because of the Data Model prowess of RDF (self-describing instance-data), the data interchange and transformation power of XML and XSLT respectively, the inherent power of XML based Web Services (REST or SOAP), and of course, having a Hybrid Server product like Virtuoso at my disposal that delivers a cross platform solution for exploiting all of these standards coherently.

I can share the self-describing describing data source that serves my Meshup. Try reusing the data presented by a Mashup via the same URL that you used to locate Mashup to get my drift.

Demo Links:

1. Googlebase Query URL as an RDF Data Source
2. Perform a simple Data Mesh by adding (via link copy and paste) this Upcoming.org Query Services URL for Ajax Events to the RDF Browsers list of Data Sources (paste into the Data Source URI input field).

What does this all mean?

"Context" is the catalyst of the burgeoning Data Web (Semantic Web Layer - 1). It's the emerging appreciation of "Context" that is driving the growing desire to increment Web versions from 2.0 to 3.0. It also the the very same "Context" that has been a preoccupation of Semantic Web vision since its inception.

The journey towards a more Semantic Web is all inclusive (all "ANDs" and no "ORs" re. participation).

The Semantic Web is self-annotating. Web 2.0 has provided a huge contribution to the self annotation effort: on the Web we now have Data Spaces for Bookmarks (e.g del.icio.us), Image Galleries ( e.g Flickr), Discussion Forums (remember those comments associated with blog posts? ditto the pingbacks and trackbacks?), People Profiles (FOAF, XFN, del.icio.us, and those crumbling walled-gardens around many Social Networks), and more..

A Web without granular access to Data is simply not a Web worth having (think about the menace of click-fraud and spam).

We are hitting a little problem re. Web 3.0 and Web 2.0, naturally :-) Web 2.0 is one of several (present and future) Dimensions of Web Interaction that turns Web Sites into Web Services Endpoints; a point I've made repeatedly [1] [2] [3] [4] across the blogosphere, in addition to my early futile attempts to make the Wikipedia's Web 2.0 article meaningful (circa 2005), as per the Wikipedia Web 2.0 Talk Page excerpt below:

Web 2.0 is a web of executable endpoints and well formed content. The executable endpoints and well formed content are accessible via URIs. Put differently, Web 2.0 is a web defined by URIs for invoking Web Services and/or consuming or syndicating well formed content.

Hopefully, someone with more time on their hands will expand on this ( I am kinda busy)

.

BTW - Web 2.0 being a platform doesn't distinguish it in anyway from Web 1.0. They are both platforms, the difference comes down to platform focus and mode of experience.

Web 3.0 is about Data Spaces: Points of Semantic Web Presence that provide granular access to Data, Information, and Knowledge via Conceptual Data Model oriented Query Languages and/or APIs.

The common denominator across all the current and future Web Interaction Dimensions is HTTP. While their differences are as follows:

Web 1.0 - Browser (HTTP + (X)HTML)

Web 2.0 - Presence (Web Service Endpoints for REST or SOAP over HTTP)

Web 3.0 - Presence (Query Languages, Data Models, and HTTP based Query Oriented Web Service Endpoints)

Examples of Web 3.0 Infrastructure:

1. Query Languages: SPARQL, Googlebase Query Language, Facebook Query Language (FQL), and many others to come
2. Query Language aligned Web Services (Query Services): SPARQL Protocol, GData, or REST style Web services such as Facebook's service for FQL.
3. Data Models: Concrete Conceptual Data Model (which RDF happens to deliver for Web Data)

Web 3.0 is not purely about Web Sites becoming Web Services endpoints. It is about the "M" (Data Model) taking it's place in the MVC pattern as applied to the Web Platform.

I will repeat myself yet again:

The Devil is in the Details of the Data Model. Data Models make or break everything. You ignore data at your own peril. No amount of money in the bank will protect you from Data Ignorance! A bad Data Model will bring down any venture or enterprise, the only variable is time (where time is directly related to your increasing need to obtain, analyze, and then act on data, over repetitive operational cycles, that have ever decreasing intervals).

This applies to the Real-time enterprise of Information and/or knowledge workers and Real-time Web Users alike.

BTW - Data Makes Shifts Happen (spotter: Sam Sethi).

Linking personal posted content across communities: "

With the help of Kingsley, Uldis and I have been looking at how SIOC can be used to link the content that a single person posts to a number of community sites. The picture below shows an example of stuff that I’ve created on Flickr, YouTube, etc. through my various user identities on those sites (these match some SIOC types that we want to add to a separate module). We can also say that each Web 2.0 content item is a user-contributed post, with some attached or embedded content (e.g. a file or maybe just some metadata). This is part of a new discussion on the sioc-dev mailing list, and we’d value your contributions.

Edit: The inner layer is a person (semantically described in FOAF), the next layer is their user accounts (described in FOAF, SIOC) and the outer layer is the posted content - text, files, associated metadata - on community sites (again described using SIOC).

(Via John Breslin - Cloudlands.)

The point that John is making about the Data Web and Interlinked Data Spaces exposed via URIs (e.g Personal URIs), crystallizes a number of very important issues about the Data Web that may remain unclear. I am hoping that by digesting the post excerpt above, in conjunction with the items below, aids the pursuit of clarity and comprehension about the all important Data Web (Semantic Web - Layer 1):

1. Your OpenID can be Your Personal URI (as noted by Henry Story's post about: The Many Uses of OpenID). That that's what I have courtesy of OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS)
2. The above only works unobtrusively (i.e. OpenID and Personal sharing a URI) if Content Negotiation is exploited on the Client and Server sides.
3. TimBL's call out to Share Your Data and Link to Other Data via URIs via post titled: Give Yourself a URI.
4. W3C's Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies
5. W3C's Architecture of the World Wide Web - Vol 1 which covers URI Dereferencing (HTTP GET-ing the data that a URI points to)
6. Richard Cyganiak's post titled: Debugging Semantic Web Sites with Curl.

Examples of some of these principles in practice:

1. Chris Bizer, Tobias Gaub, and Richard's Javascript based Semantic Web Client Library
2. DISCO RDF Browser
3. OpenLink Ajax Toolkit's (OAT) RDF Browser
4. OpenLink Interactive SPARQL Query by Example (iSPARQL QBE)
5. Dynamic Data Web Pages from my prior posts [1][2][3]
6. dbpedia (Wikipedia as a Data Web oriented Data Source)
7. And of course this blog post's permalink is a bona fide dereferencable URI.

And of course there is more to come such as Grandma's Semantic Web Browser which is coming from Zitgist LLC (pronounced: Zeitgeist) a joint venture of OpenLink Software and Frederick Giasson.

Web Me2.0 -- Exploding the Myth of Web 2.0:

"Many people have told me this week that they think 'Web 2.0' has not been very impressive so far and that they really hope for a next-generation of the Web with some more significant innovation under the hood -- regardless of what it's called. A lot of people found the Web 2.0 conference in San Francisco to be underwhelming -- there was a lot of self-congratulation by the top few brands and the companies they have recently bought, but not much else happening. Where was all the innovation? Where was the focus on what's next? It seemed to be a conference mainly about what happened in the last year, not about what will happen in the coming year. But what happened last year is already so 'last year.' And frankly Web 2.0 still leaves a lot to be desired. The reason Tim Berners-Lee proposed the Semantic Web in the first place is that it will finally deliver on the real potential and vision of the Web. Not that today's Web 2.0 sucks completely -- it only sort of sucks. It's definitely useful and there are some nice bells and whistles we didn't have before. But it could still suck so much less!"

Web 2.0 is a (not was) a piece of the overall Web puzzle. The Data Web (so called Web 3.0) is another critical piece of this puzzle, especially as it provides the foundation layer (Layer 1) of the Semantic Web.

Web 2.0 was never about "Open Data Access", "Flexible Data Models", or "Open World" meshing of disparate data sources built atop disparate data schemas (see: Web 2.0's Open Data Access Conundrum). It was simply about "Execution and APIs". I already written about "Web Interaction Dimensions", but you call also look at the relationship of the currently perceived dimensions through the M-V-C programming pattern:

1. Viewer (V) - Web 1.0 (Interaction, Dimension 1 - Interactive-Web)
2. Controller (C) - Web 2.0 (Services, Dimension 2 - Services-Web which is about Execution & Application Logic; SOA outside/in-front-of the Firewall for Enterprise 2.0 crowd)
3. Model (M) - Web 3.0 (Data, Dimension 3 - Data-Web which is about data model dexterity and open data access)

Another point to note, Social Networking is hot, but nearly every social network that I know (and I know and use most of them) suffers from an impedance mismatch between the service(s) they provide (social networks) and their underlying data models (in many cases Relational as opposed to Graph). Networks are about Relationships (N-ary) and your cannot effectively exploit the deep potential of: "Network Effects" (Wisdom of Crowds, Viral Marketing etc..) without a complimentary data model, you simply can't.

Finally, the Data Web is already here, I promised a long time ago (Internet Time) that the manifestation of the Semantic Web would occur unobtrusively, meaning, we will wake up one day and realize we are using critical portions of the Semantic Web (i.e. Data-Web) without even knowing it. Guess what? It's already happening. Simple case in point, you may have started to notice the emergence of SIOC gems in the same way you may have observed those RSS 2.0 gems at the dawn of Web 2.0. What I am implying here is that the real question we should be asking is: Where is the Semantic Web Data? And how easy or difficult will it be to generate? And where are the tools? My answers are presented below:

1. Pingthesemanticweb.com - Semantic Web Data Source Lookup & Tracking Service
2. Swoogle - Semantic Web Ontology Location Service
3. Semantic Web Solutions for Generating RDF Data from SQL Data
4. Semantic Web Solutions Directory
5. SIOC Project - Semantically-Interlinked Online Communities Ontology, a grassroots effort that provides a critical bridge between Web 2.0 and the Data-Web. For instance, existing Web 2.0 application profiles such as; Blogs, Wikis, Feed Aggregators, Content Managers, Discussion Forums etc.. are much closer to the Data-Web than you may think :-)
6. Virtuoso - our Universal Server for the Data-Web
7. OpenLink Data Spaces (ODS) - our SIOC based platform for transparent incorporation of the Data-Web into Web 1.0 and Web 2.0

Next stop, less writing, more demos, these are long overdue! At least from my side of the fence :-) I need to produce a little step-by-guide oriented screencasts that demonstrates how Web 2.0 meshes nicely with the Data-Web.

Here are some (not so end-user friendly) examples of how you can use SPARQL (Data-Web's Query Language) to query Web 2.0 Instance Data projected through the SIOC Ontology:

1. Weblog Data Query
2. Wiki Data Query
3. Aggregated Feeds Data Query - (RSS 1.0, RSS 2.0, Atom etc)
4. Shared Bookmarks Data Space
5. Web Filesystem Data Query - (Briefcase - Virtual Spotlight of sorts)
6. Photo Gallery Data Query (this could be data from Flickr etc..)
7. Discussion Data Query (e.g. Blog posts comments)
8. Data Queries across different Data Spaces - combining data from Wikis, Blogs, Feeds, Photos, Bookmarks, Discussions etc..

Note: You can use the online SPARQL Query Interface at: http://demo.openlinksw.com/isparql.

Other Data-Web Technology usage demos include:

1. TimBL's Tabulator - A Data-Web Browser
2. Semantic Web Client Library - RDF Data Drill Down Demos using SPARQL
3. Semantic Radar - A Firefox plug-in for auto-discovering SIOC Instance Data
4. Talk Digger - SIOC based Web Conversation Tracker