On 16 Aug 2014, at 12:57, David Wood <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Aug 15, 2014, at 1:55 PM, Mark Baker <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 6:04 AM, Christian Bizer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>>> But I wonder where so many other sites (including mine) went ? >>> >>> The problem with crawling the Web of Linked Data is really that it is hard >>> to get the datasets on the edges that set RDF links to other sources but >>> are not the target of links from well-connected sources. >> >> I'm curious, why you don't just crawl the whole Web looking for linked data? > > > Or better yet, work with one of the search engines or Open Crawl so you can > use their indexes. Well there is possibly a quick answer to this. Google, at least, doesn’t index Linked Data. Well, certainly not the kind that does conneg. See other recent messages on this list about the problem of SEO of Linked Data, which is another side of the same coin. Checking Google: Looking at http://dbpedia.org/resource/Birching If I take a URI from (the RDF I get from) that page, and search for it in Google, I think I would expect it to take me to quite a few RDF documents in various formats. But, for example, https://www.google.com/#filter=0&q=%22http://ru.dbpedia.org/resource/Розги%22 (asking for all results in the filter=0), shows no RDF documents at all. Of course, RDF documents would have …/data/… in them, rather than …/resource/… or …/page/… And, in fact, searching for dbpedia/data https://www.google.com/#q=%22dbpedia.org%2Fdata%22 only gives 1.2M hits, which is way short of what it would be. Not my field, so I may have it wrong, but I felt like checking it out on a stormy Sunday afternoon! Best Hugh > > Regards, > Dave > -- > http://about.me/david_wood > Sent from my iPad > >> >> Mark. >> > -- Hugh Glaser 20 Portchester Rise Eastleigh SO50 4QS Mobile: +44 75 9533 4155, Home: +44 23 8061 5652
