The point in time property of the award received is what Wikidata calls a qualifier:
Along with sources and ranks, qualifiers allow statements to be expanded on, annotated, or contextualized beyond what can be expressed in just a simple property-value pair.
Here is the modified query to access the point in time of the award received:
SELECT ?item ?...
The two links below are NOAA/NWS weather terms used in their datasets:
This document is the vocabulary for the annual summaries:
This document is the vocabulary for the daily summaries
These are a ...
...but extracting the hierarchical information is non-trivial.
DBpedia T-Box dump is available to download as a separate file from this
Wikidata classes and properties dumps are available to download as separate files from this
I am searching for a database containing a hierarchical ontology of
Many of the so-called upper ...
I'm not sure I agree that you need to have any URI to demonstrate how open a set of data is. Either the data is open and shareable or it is not, the openness of the data is described by the openness of the data.
Let's say I publish a set of RDF linked data, as soon as it is published it is open to be consumed as a whole or in part, people can take which ...
We (met.no) plan on publishing a JSON-LD vocabulary for climate/weather data, when we release our public portal later this year. We'll be publishing JSON-LD ourselves as our primary data format.
To the best of my knowledge, there isn't anything else stable out there yet suitable for this kind of use. The closest you get, AFAIK, is http://codes.wmo.int/
I would use purl.org yes. That's weird that they're not answering. They answered pretty quickly when I tried myself. There's also https://w3id.org/ if you're looking for stable and persistent identifiers.
The best however could also simply be to publish the vocabulary yourself. One of the issues with using URIs for the vocabulary of your data is that there'...
The Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms, published by one of your employer's (?) customers, is known now as Psychology Ontology.
This ontology is not even a taxonomy, but rather a flat list of classes.
BioPortal provides mappings between this ontology and many other ontologies.
Additionally, BioPortal contains other ontologies published by APA:
The open directory project DMOZ is probably too shallow for scientific use, but maybe appropriate to get a "average Joe" perspective on concepts visible in such topics as
Another more extensive, but messier and more involved procedure to look into the structure of Wikipedia categories. Here is an ...
There are several "common" ontologies published for Open Data. Here are some:
Linked Open Vocabulary (LOV): http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/
Linked Open Data (LOD) : http://linkeddata.org/
We (OpenGeoCode) have our own published ontology:
I wouldn't say 'dead'. There might be less dicussion of it, as people consider things to be stable enough that there are useful products that it's less hyped.
I'd personally advise against making a new ontology without first consulting the field to see if there's something that you can make use of -- unless you've already encoded/catloged all of our data, ...
There are a lot of different definitions of "ontology" out there. In my opinion this here is highly relevant in practice:
An ontology is a formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization.
See this article for a formal discussion (ignore the "math", read the text).
For concept and conceptualization (conceptual model) see Wiki-pedia or page ...
https://gist.github.com/VladimirAlexiev/fafdcb258d067cfed272664d6ae5d982 describes 6 datasets of Science Classification. Will keep it up to date as we progress.
One of them is CSO, which is now publically available. It has about 2-3k CompSci topics.
In comparison, MAG has 229k topics in all scientific areas.
It is unlikely that the entire Klink-2 Computer Science Ontology is openly available online.
The authors decide to monetize their research creating Rexplore.
It seems that the generated CSO ontology is a very substantil part of the project.
The demo of Rexplore is available here. Following instructions, one can generate topic trees for different series of ...
Possible answers were listed in your previous questions.
Perhaps some upper ontologies contain what you need.
Another possible source is Wikidata. For example, this is SVM's page on Wikidata. As you can see, the wdt:P279 ("subclass of") predicate currently corresponds to the parent-child relation you are talking about.
The query below lists all parent-...
There is no global "LOD hierarhy" of terms. There are various ontologies and knowledge bases, and each has its own idea of the world.
I'd use Wikidata items for the the terms that you've mentioned. They are not in a global hierarchy, they may be lacking links (eg I'm not sure there's any link between patient and hospital) and you may disagree with whatever ...
The word missing from your question is "Ontology", and in particular "Industrial Ontology", or even more specific "Financial Industry Business Ontology". I think with that vocabulary, you can find some good results about how other industries organize data between companies. Whether or not you keep a central data repository, the data is ...
The Encyclopedia of Life includes a database called TraitBank that includes some of these quantitative traits. For example, the entry for Luna Moth has a wingspan entry but unfortunately no mass. EOL is queryable via API or SPARQL.
As you are looking for open data you may not get all that you desire and this species of moth appears to be found only in the USA, so you should be looking for websites recording species in the USA.
Not being an US citizen or lepidopterist my searching ended up at the GBIF website I also found this catalogue of portals type website which may be of use in ...
Here below I'm using examples from comments to your previous question.
Linked Data Fragments
For simple queries, you could use Linked Data Fragments:
Add Accept: application/json header, if you need a JSON response.
For complex queries, you could use SPARQL.
For example, you don't need to know preliminarily, whether a resource ...
YAGO Demo page lists two possible ways:
Explore YAGO with our graph browser (YAGO3)
Explore YAGO with our ontology browser (YAGO2)
You can find what you need using query builder.
There also exists SPARQL endpoint.
Use Wikipedia urls to identify the hash type.
(That's 5 star out of the box)
For your other questions use Linked Open Vocabularies.
If that fails, use your own URLs (5 star please) and if you later on discover, that there are more appropriate URLs for it, add and distribute owl:sameAs or rdfs:subPropertyOf triples alongside your data (depending on what ...
You should create these URIs yourself, as well as mainteiners of all other DCAT catalogues.
Look at Data Quality Vocabulary, which is based on DCAT. Consider the following example from the section 6.7:
a dcat:Dataset ;
dqv:hasQualityAnnotation :classificationQA .