Lisa Barrier, Katherina Fostano, Ailina Mayer, Esperanza Pacheco, &

Rebecca Plock

LIS 653-02 Fall 2013- Knowledge Organization- Professor Cristina Pattuelli

In order to understand the meaning of Linked Open Data we must first understand the concept of Open Data. Open data is defined by Karl Aberer in The semantic web proceedings as the idea that data should be freely available to everyone to use and republish as they wish, without restrictions from copyrights, patents, or other mechanisms of control. This can be better understood by a similar movement that might be familiar to users in academic research, such as open access journals, which are scholarly journals that are available online to the reader "without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.” The goals of open data are very similar to those of open access. Now the idea behind linked open data is that this available data is structured in a way that can be interlinked and become more useful. As stated by Heath Bizer, the term “Linked Data” refers to a set of best practices for publishing and connecting structured data on the Web.

The main cons of linked data and linked open data consist of technological, legal, and privacy issues.

1. Use URIs as names for data

We are experiencing a shift in the roles of libraries as they change from physical institutions to being in essence “borderless.” Libraries, archives, galleries, and museums will become more of a network as opposed to singular institutions but will continue to be information gateways. It is virtually painless for libraries to adapt to the Linked Open Data structure since libraries already have much of the Linked Data Triples needed in their catalogues and the system can consume the existing catalogue content.

The benefits of linked open data include a decrease in internal data ‘silos,’ the creation of a ‘web of data’ through interlinked data, and an increased understanding by both humans and machines of complex concepts.

Worldwide, there are many libraries and institutions that are leading the way in this field. Examples include the Library of Congress, Cambridge University Library, Europeana, British National Bibliography, World Cat, Libris, and the Open Library. Currently, this mission to link the world’s data has experienced dilemmas and setbacks since some organizations have been reluctant to be involved, issues about copyright and licensing still needs to be addressed as well as dealing with provenance information. All libraries, special collections, organizations, and institutions need to cooperate and adapt for true success and functionality of Linked Open Data.

4. Include links to other URIs, so that users can discover more information

2. Use HTTP URIs to make it easier for users to look up names

3. When a user looks up the URI, provide useful information using the standards (RDF, SPARQL)

In contrast to data silos, linked data is concerned with sharing data across the web. Each piece of the data is given a unique URI.

RDF triples explicitly state the relationship between objects and concepts, creating an entity-relationship model that helps humans and computers understand complex ideas.

Data sources can be accessed using data browsers and allow for the entire data space to be browsed by search engines.

Merged data can often lead to language and accessibility issues. RDFs need to constantly be updated, but who can maintain the entire Web?

For many, linking data includes many data discrepancies and can cause copyright problems, lack of trustworthiness or quality, or, in extreme cases, disclosure of private or personal information.

Watch Video: Linked Open Data - What is it?

By EuropeanaEU

Required reading:Bizer, C., Heath, T., & Berners-Lee, T. (2009). Linked data- the story so far. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), 5 (3), 1-22. http://tomheath.com/papers/bizer-heath-berners-lee-ijswis-linked-data.pdf

Suggested reading:Bauer, F., & Kaltenböck, M. (2012). Linked open data: the essentials: a quick start guide for decision makers. Vienna: edition mono/monochrom. http://www.semantic-web.at/LOD-TheEssentials.pdf

We would like to acknowledge Professor Maria Cristina Pattuelli for the research opportunity, the Pratt Manhattan Library for its resources, and Tim Berners-Lee for his Linked Open Data enthusiasm.

Available on the web (whatever format) but with an open license, to be Open DataAvailable as machine-readable structured data (e.g. excel instead of image scan of a table)As (2) plus non-proprietary format (e.g. CSV instead of excel)

All the above, plus use open standards from W3C (RDF and SPARQL) to identify things, so that people can point at your stuff

All the above, plus: Link your data to other people’s data to provide context

Watch video: Linked Data for LibrariesBy OCLC

Back

grou

nd Im

age:

Nat

iona

l Geo

grap

hic

Atla

s of

the

Wor

ld

LIS 653-02 Knowledge OrganizationClaire DunningKatherine HesslerRachel SmileyFreya Yost

REFERENCESBaca, M. (12/9/2009). Controlled Vocabularies for Art, Architecture, and Material Culture. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science, Third Edition. Doi: 10.1081/E-ELIS3-120044074 Bruns, A. (2008). Folksonomies: Produsage and/of knowledge structures. In Blogs, Wikipedia, second life, and beyond: From production to produsage (171-198). Peter Lang: New York. Furner, J. (09 Dec 2009). Folksonomies. In Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120043238# Kroski, E. (2007). Folksonomies and user-based technology. In N. Courney (Ed.), Library 2.0 and beyond: Innovative technologies and tomorrow’s user (91-104). Libraries Unlimited: Westport, CT.Levy, P. (2013). The creative conversation of collective intelligence. In A. Delwiche & J. J. Henderson (Eds.), The participatory cultures handbook (99-108). Routledge: New York.McDaniel, C. (2012, October 11). Ontology, Taxonomy and Folksonomy. Digital History Rice. Retrieved December 1, 2013, from http://digitalhistory.blogs.rice.edu/2012/10/11/ontology-taxonomy-and-folksonomy Mathes, A. (n.d.). Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata. Folksonomies - Cooperative Classification and Communication Through Shared Metadata. Retrieved December 1, 2013, from http://www.adammathes.com/academic/computer-mediated-communication/folksonomies.html Pirmann, C. (2012). Tags in the Catalogue: Insights From a Usability Study of LibraryThing for Libraries. Library Trends, 61(1), 234-247.Porter, J. (2011). Folksonomies in the Library: their impact on user experience and their implications for the work of librarians. The Australian Library Journal, 60(3), 248-255.Rolla, P. (2009). User Tags versus Subject Headings: Can User-Supplied Data Improve Subject Access to Library Collections? Library Resources and Technical Services, 53(3), 174-184.Sanderson, B. & Rigby, M. (November 2013). We’ve Reddit, have you?: What librarians can learn from a site full of memes. College and Research Libraries News, 74 (10), 518-521. http://crln.acrl.org/content/74/10/518.full.pdf+html Terdiman, D. (01 February 2005). Folksonomies tap people power. Wired, 13 (2). Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2005/02/66456?currentPage=all Trant, J. & Wyman, B. (2006). Investigating social tagging and folksonomy in art museums with steve.museum [PDF]. Retrieved 11/10/13 from http://www.ra.ethz.ch/cdstore/www2006/www.rawsugar.com/www2006/4.pdf Vander Wal, T. (2007, February 2). Folksonomy. Home. Retrieved December 1, 2013, from http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWe would like to thank Dr. Cristina Pattuelli and Bree Midavaine for their input and assistance with this project.