Re: 15 Ways to Think About Data Quality (Just for a Start)

>
> So yes, I think you should feel a little embarrassed about broadcasting
> links to a demo in which the very first piece of data one sees is obviously
> wrong.
>
> To you the first piece of that is an owl:sameAs assertion. That's 100% fine
> for you, but that isn't true for everyone else. It just isn't.
>

Why, is the page dynamically reconfigured for other people? I'm not saying
"first" in some mushy philosophical sense, I'm talking about the first
attribute that appears in the structured-data section of the page, right
under the headings "Attributes" and "Values".

You've got billions of entities in dbpedia, and the technology doesn't care
> which one you pick, so surely you could pick one where the errors aren't as
> prominent.
>
>
> No, DBpedia doesn't have a billions of entities, that just one dataset.
>

What? Whatever: you've got plenty of other entities, so surely you could
pick one where the errors aren't as prominent. Here, for example, is the
next one I tried:

http://lod.openlinksw.com/describe/?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FTori_Amos

There are some dubious bits to this, too (she only "composed" one song?** a
person is "subsequent work" of a song?***), but at least this is a page
about a person that appears to be about a single person. Same technology,
better "demo".

In due course you will understand my point.


Understood your points the first hundred times you stated them. Any time
you'd like to take a turn understanding mine, feel free.


> You characterization is 100% inaccurate.


In the context of your insistence on the subjectivity of everything, I
assume this is intended as a joke. Funnier without the typo.


**Completeness failure
***Modeling Correctness error