ODBC & WODBC Comparison

ODBC delivers open data access (by reference) to a broad range of enterprise databases via a 'C' based API. Thanks to the iODBC and unixODBC projects, ODBC is available across broad range of platforms beyond Windows.

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) :-)

Commercializing the Semantic Web


Unfortunately, I could only spend 4 days at the recent WWW2008 event in Beijing (I departed the morning following the Linked Data Workshop), so I couldn't take my slot on the "Commercializing the Semantic Web panel" etc.. Anyway, thanks to the Web I can still inject my points of view in the broad Web based discourse. Well so I hoped, when I attempted to post a comment to Paul Miller's ZDNet domain hosted blog thread titled: Commercialising the Semantic Web.

Unfortunately, the cost of completing ZDNet's unwieldy signup process simply exceeded the benefits of dropping my comments in their particular space :-( Thus, I'll settle for a trackback ping instead.

What follows is the cut and paste of my intended comment contributions to Paul's post.

Paul,

As discussed earlier this week during our podcast session, commercialization of Semantic Web technology shouldn't be a mercurial matter at this stage in the game :-) It's all about looking at how it provides value :-)

From the Linked Data angle, the ability to produce, dispatch, and exploit "Context" across an array of "Perspectives" from a plethora of disparate data sources on the Web and/or behind corporate firewalls, offers immense commercial value.

Yahoo's Searchmonkey effort will certainly bring clarity to some of the points I made during the podcast re. the role of URIs as "value consumption tickets" (Data Services are exposed via URIs). There has to be a trigger (in user space) that compels Web users to seek broader, or simply varied, perspectives as a response to data encountered on the Web. Yahoo! is about to put this light on in a big way (imho).

The "self annotating" nature of the Web is what ultimately drives the manifestation of the long awaited Semantic Web. I believe I postulated about "Self Annotation & the Semantic Web" in a number of prior posts which, by the way, should be DataRSS compatible right now due to Yahoo's support of OpenSearch Data Providers (which this Blog Space has been for eons).

Today, have many communities adding strucuture to the Web (via their respective tools of preference) without explicitly realizing what they are contributing. Every RSS/Atom feed, Tag, Weblog, Shared Bookmark, Wikiword, Microformat, Microformat++ (eRDF or RDFa), GRDDL stylesheet, and RDFizer etc.. is a piece of structured data.

Finally, the different communities are all finding ways to work together (thank heavens!) and the results are going to be cataclysmic when it all plays out :-)

Data, Structure, and Extraction are the keys to the Semantic Life! First you get the Data in a container (information resource), and then you add Structure to the information resource (RSS, Atom, microformats, RDFa, eRDF, SIOC, FOAF, etc.), once you have Structure RDFization (i.e. transformation to Linked Data) is a synch thanks to RDF Middleware (as per earlier RDF middleware posts).


Commercializing the Semantic Web

Unfortunately, I could only spend 4 days at the recent WWW2008 event in Beijing (I departed the morning following the Linked Data Workshop), so I couldn't take my slot on the "Commercializing the Semantic Web panel" etc.. Anyway, thanks to the Web I can still inject my points of view in the broad Web based discourse. Well so I hoped, when I attempted to post a comment to Paul Miller's ZDNet domain hosted blog thread titled: Commercialising the Semantic Web.

Unfortunately, the cost of completing ZDNet's unwieldy signup process simply exceeded the benefits of dropping my comments in their particular space :-( Thus, I'll settle for a trackback ping instead.

What follows is the cut and paste of my intended comment contributions to Paul's post.

Paul,

As discussed earlier this week during our podcast session, commercialization of Semantic Web technology shouldn't be a mercurial matter at this stage in the game :-) It's all about looking at how it provides value :-)

From the Linked Data angle, the ability to produce, dispatch, and exploit "Context" across an array of "Perspectives" from a plethora of disparate data sources on the Web and/or behind corporate firewalls, offers immense commercial value.

Yahoo's Searchmonkey effort will certainly bring clarity to some of the points I made during the podcast re. the role of URIs as "value consumption tickets" (Data Services are exposed via URIs). There has to be a trigger (in user space) that compels Web users to seek broader, or simply varied, perspectives as a response to data encountered on the Web. Yahoo! is about to put this light on in a big way (imho).

The "self annotating" nature of the Web is what ultimately drives the manifestation of the long awaited Semantic Web. I believe I postulated about "Self Annotation & the Semantic Web" in a number of prior posts which, by the way, should be DataRSS compatible right now due to Yahoo's support of OpenSearch Data Providers (which this Blog Space has been for eons).

Today, have many communities adding strucuture to the Web (via their respective tools of preference) without explicitly realizing what they are contributing. Every RSS/Atom feed, Tag, Weblog, Shared Bookmark, Wikiword, Microformat, Microformat++ (eRDF or RDFa), GRDDL stylesheet, and RDFizer etc.. is a piece of structured data.

Finally, the different communities are all finding ways to work together (thank heavens!) and the results are going to be cataclysmic when it all plays out :-)

Data, Structure, and Extraction are the keys to the Semantic Life! First you get the Data in a container (information resource), and then you add Structure to the information resource (RSS, Atom, microformats, RDFa, eRDF, SIOC, FOAF, etc.), once you have Structure RDFization (i.e. transformation to Linked Data) is a synch thanks to RDF Middleware (as per earlier RDF middleware posts).

My Talis Podcast re. Semantic Web, Linked Data, and OpenLink Software

My podcast interview with Paul Miller of Talis is out. As I listened to the podcast (naturally awkward affair) I got a first hand sense of Paul's mastery of the art of interviewing, even when dealing with a fast talking data blitzers like me. Personally, I think I still talk a little too fast (the Nigerian in me), especially when the subject matter hones right into the epicenter of my professional passions: Open Data Access and Heterogeneous Data Integration (aka. Virtual Database Technology) -- so you may need to rewind every now and then during the interview :-)

During this particular podcast interview, I deliberately wanted to have an conversation about the practical value of Linked Data, rather than the technical innards. The fundamental utility of Linked Data remains somewhat mercurial, and I am certainly hoping to do my bit at the upcoming Linked Data Planet conference re. demonstrating and articulating linked data value across the blurring realms of "the individual" and "the enterprise".

Note to my old schoolmates on Facebook: when you listen to this podcast you will at least reconcile "Uyi Idehen" with "Kingsley Idehen". Unfortunately, Facebook refuses to let me Identify myself in the manner I choose. Ideally, I would like to have the name: "Kingsley (Uyi) Idehen" associated with my Facebook ID since this is the Identifier known to my personal network of friends, family, and old schoolmates. This Identity predicament is a long running Identity case study in the making.

On "Semantic", "Semantic Web", and "Linked Data Web"

Nova Spivack has just penned a post titled: On the Difference Between "Semantic" and "Semantic Web", where he covers the fundamental difference between "Semantic" (what I call "Semantics Inside") and "Semantic Web" applications. I would like to extend the distinctions further by adding the "Linked Data Web" distinctions to the developing discourse.

The Linked Data Web (aka. Linked Data) describes RDF data injected into the Web, where the Data Object Identifiers (URIs) in an RDF graph (collection of RDF triples) are endowed with HTTP based URIs. The net effect of this approach to Data Object Identity is that it facilitates "Open Data Access by Reference" on the Web (aka data dereferencing).

If you recall pre Web ubiquity, in the enterprise realm for instance, Open Database Connectivity (ODBC) emerged as a mechanism for separating Data Access and Data Management in the database oriented Client-Sever model. Although ODBC gave you access to data, the data access entry point took the form of a data access specific naming mechanism called a "Data Source Name" (DSN). ODBC DSNs typically exposed Tables or Views. The same thing applies to JDBC where a non HTTP based URN scheme applies.

Zip forward to where we are today on the Web; the Web is evolving from a Document centric Database to a Distributed Object Database, and you should see that in Linked Data we are now truly looking at the best of all worlds: Web Open Database Connectivity (WODBC) with the following advantages:

    - direct Access to a single Record (an Entity) or Record Sets (RDF based Entity Sets) by reference over HTTP across disparate Data Spaces on the Web
    - the ability to mesh disparate data sources without being impeded by back-end DBMS engine model, vendor, host operating development frameworks, or host operating system specificity
    - an opportunity to learn from the enterprise DBMS market and Client-Server markets of yore with regards to the shape and form of next generation Linked Data Web oriented solutions.

To conclude, we now have "Semantics Inside" (RDF or non RDF), "Semantic Web" (RDF graphs with Object Identifiers that may or may not be HTTP based), and "Linked Data Web" (RDF graphs with Object Identifiers that must be HTTP based and dereferencable) oriented applications, in the emerging landscape associated with the "Semantics" moniker.

As per usual, this post is a record in my Blog oriented Data Space on the Web. The permalink of this post is a URI constructed with Giant Global Graph enrichment in mind :-)

Comments about recent Semantic Gang Podcast

After listening to the latest Semantic Web Gang podcast, I found myself agreeing with some of the points made by Alex Iskold, specifically:

    -- Business exploitation of Linked Data on the Web will certainly be driven by the correlation of opportunity costs (which is more than likely what Alex meant by "use cases") associated with the lack of URIs originating from the domain of a given business (Tom Heath: also effectively alluded to this via his BBC and URI land grab anecdotes; same applies Georgi's examples)
    -- History is a great tutor, answers to many of today's problems always lie somewhere in plain sight of the past.

Of course, I also believe that Linked Data serves Web Data Integration across the Internet very well too, and the fact that it will be beneficial to businesses in a big way. No individual or organization is an island, I think the Internet and Web have done a good job of demonstrating that thus far :-) We're all data nodes in a Giant Global Graph.

Daniel lewis did shed light on the read-write aspects of the Linked Data Web, which is actually very close to the callout for a Wikipedia for Data. TimBL has been working on this via Tabulator (see Tabulator Editing Screencast), Bengamin Nowack also added similar functionality to ARC, and of course we support the same SPARQL UPDATE into an RDF information resource via the RDF Sink feature of our WebDAV and ODS-Briefcase implementations.

XTech Talks covering Linked Data

Courtesy a post by Chris Bizer to the LOD community mailing list, here is a list of Linked Data oriented talks at the upcoming XTech 2008 event (also see the XTech 2008 Schedule which is Linked Data friendly). Of course, I am posting this to my Blog Data Space with the sole purpose of adding data to the rapidly growing Giant Global Graph of Linked Data, basically adding to my collection of live Linked Data utility demos :-)

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) :-)

Clearing Up RDF misrepresentation once again!

Daniel Lewis has penned a post titled: Clearing up some misconceptions..again, in response to Ben Werdmuller's post titled: Introducing the Open Data Definition.

The great thing about the Linked Data Web is that it's much easier to discovery and respond to these points of view before the ink dries :-) Ben certainly needs to take a look at the Semantic Web FAQ pre or post assimilation of Daniel's response.

Linked Data enters state of Evoluation

During a brief chat with Michael Hausenblas about a new Linked Data project he is championing called: LForum, I made a freudian slip, in the form of the typo: Evoluation, which at the time was supposed to have been: Evolution. Anyway, we had a chuckle and realized we were on to something, so I proceeded to formalize the definition:

Evoluation is evolution devoid of the randomness of mutation. A state of being in which it is possible to evaluate and choose evolutionary paths.

Evoluation actually describes where we are today in relation to the World Wide Web; to the Linking Open Data community (LOD), it's taking the path towards becoming a Giant Global Graph of Linked Data; to the Web 2.0 community, it's simply a collection of Web Services and associated APIs; and to many others, it remains an opaque collection of interlinked documents.

The great thing about the Web is that it allows netizens to explore a plethora of paths without adversely affecting the paths of others. That said, controlling one's path may take mutation out of evolution, but we are still left with the requirement to adapt and eventually survive in a competitive environment. Thus, although we can evaluate and choose from the many paths the Web's evolution offers us, the path that delivers the most benefits ultimately dominates. :-)

Linked Data Trip Report - Part 1 (Update 2)

Typo cleansed edition :-)

Objectives

  • Meet LOD Community Members
  • Participate in Workshop

Meeting LOD Community Members

Although the Web continues to shrink the planet by removing the restrictions of geopgrahic location, meeting people face-to-face remains invaluable (*priceless in Mastercard AD speak*). Naturally, meeting and chatting with as many LOD community members as possible was high up on my agenda.

Participate in Workshop

As one of the co-chairs of the Linking Open Data Workshop (LODW), I had a 5 minute workshop opening slot during which I spoke about the following:

Where we are today:

We have DBpedia as a major hub on the burgeoning Linked Data Web. When OpenLink offered to host DBpedia (a combination of Virtuoso DBMS Software and sizable backend Hardware infrastructure), it did so knowing that such an effort would emphatically address the "chicken and egg" conundrum that, prior to this undertaking, stifled the ability to demonstrate practical utility of HTTP based Linked Data.

Today, the Linked Data bootstrap mission has been accomplished.

Where we go next:

Although DBpedia is a hub (ground zero of Linked Data), we have to put it into perspective in relation to a new set of needs and expectations moving forward. Today, DBpedia is a Sun at the heart of a Solar System within the Linked Data Galaxy. But unlike Space as we know it, in Cyberspace we can have connectivity and collaboration across Solar Systems -- life exists elsewhere and we are part of a collaborative collective unimpeded by constraints of space travel etc. Thus, expect to see the emergence of other Solar Systems accessible to DBpedia and its collections of planets (see. LOD diagram). Examples underway include UMBEL which will serve the Linked Data planets from OpenCyc (Subject Matter Concepts), Yago (Named Entities), and Bio2RDF (which provides powerful Bio Informatics based Linked Data planet).

I urged the community to veer more aggressively towards developing and demonstrating practical Linked Data driven solutions that are aligned to well known problems. Of course, I encouraged all presenters to make this an integral part of their presentations :-)

Workshop Summary:

The workshop was well attended and I found all the presentations engaging and full of enthusiasm.

As the sessions progressed, it became clear during a number of accompanying Q&A sessions that a new Linked Data exploitation frontier is emerging. The frontier in question takes the form of a Linked Data substrate capable of addressing the taxonomic needs of solutions aimed at automated Named Entity Extraction, Disambiguation, Subject matter Concept alignment, transparently integrated with existing Web Content. Thus, we are moving beyond the minting and deployment of of dereferencable URIs and RDF data sets to automagically associating existing Web Content with Named Entities (People, Organizations, Places, Events etc..) and Subject matter Concepts (Politics, Music, Sports, and others) while remaining true to the Linking Open Data Community creed i.e. ensuring the Named Entity and Subject matter Concept URIs are available to user agents or users seeking to produce alternative data views (i.e. Mesh-ups).

I will get to part 2 of this report once the actual workshop sessions slides go live (*these are different from the pre-event PDFs links*).