Refine
Document Type
- Part of Periodical (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Linked Open Data (2) (remove)
Institute
Modeling and publishing Linked Open Data (LOD) involves the choice of which vocabulary to use. This choice is far from trivial and poses a challenge to a Linked Data engineer. It covers the search for appropriate vocabulary terms, making decisions regarding the number of vocabularies to consider in the design process, as well as the way of selecting and combining vocabularies. Until today, there is no study that investigates the different strategies of reusing vocabularies for LOD modeling and publishing. In this paper, we present the results of a survey with 79 participants that examines the most preferred vocabulary reuse strategies of LOD modeling. Participants of our survey are LOD publishers and practitioners. Their task was to assess different vocabulary reuse strategies and explain their ranking decision. We found significant differences between the modeling strategies that range from reusing popular vocabularies, minimizing the number of vocabularies, and staying within one domain vocabulary. A very interesting insight is that the popularity in the meaning of how frequent a vocabulary is used in a data source is more important than how often individual classes and properties arernused in the LOD cloud. Overall, the results of this survey help in understanding the strategies how data engineers reuse vocabularies, and theyrnmay also be used to develop future vocabulary engineering tools.
Schema information about resources in the Linked Open Data (LOD) cloud can be provided in a twofold way: it can be explicitly defined by attaching RDF types to the resources. Or it is provided implicitly via the definition of the resources´ properties.
In this paper, we analyze the correlation between the two sources of schema information. To this end, we have extracted schema information regarding the types and properties defined in two datasets of different size. One dataset is a LOD crawl from TimBL- FOAF profile (11 Mio. triple) and the second is an extract from the Billion Triples Challenge 2011 dataset (500 Mio. triple). We have conducted an in depth analysis and have computed various entropy measures as well as the mutual information encoded in this two manifestations of schema information.
Our analysis provides insights into the information encoded in the different schema characteristics. It shows that a schema based on either types or properties alone will capture only about 75% of the information contained in the data. From these observations, we derive conclusions about the design of future schemas for LOD.