Linked Data – the best of two worlds
On the one hand you have structured data sources such as relational DB, NoSQL datastores or OODBs and the like that allow you to query and manipulate data in a structured way. This typically involves schemata (either upfront with RDB or sort of dynamically with NoSQL that defines the data layout and the types of the fields), a notion of object identity (for example a unique row ID in RDB or a document ID in a document store) and with it to be able to refer to data items in different containers (e.g. a foreign key in a RDB) as well as the possibility to create and use indices to speed up look-up/query.
On the other hand you have the Web, a globally distributed hypermedia system, mainly for consumption by humans. There the main primitives are: an enormous collection of hyperlinked documents over the Internet with millions of servers and billions of clients (desktop, mobile devices, etc.), in its core based on simple standards: URL, HTTP, HTML.
Now, the idea with Linked Data is a simple one: take the best of both worlds and combine it, yielding large-scale structured data (incl. schema and object identity to allow straightforward manipulation) based on established Web standards (in order to benefit from the deployed infrastructure).
Sounds easy? In fact it is. The devil is in the detail. As with any piece of technology, once you start implementing it, questions arise. For example, must Linked Data be solely based on RDF or are other wire formats such as JSON, Microdata or Atom ‘allowed’? Should we use distributed vocabulary management (as mandated by the Semantic Web) or is it OK to use Schema.org? Depending on whom you ask you currently may get different answers but in this case I lean towards diversity – at the end of the day what matters are URIs (object identity), HTTP (data access) and some way to represent the data in a structured format.
Filed under: Big Data, FYI, Linked Data, NoSQL