W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > January 2013

Re: Linked Data Dogfood circa. 2013

From: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 23:01:02 +0000
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
CC: "<public-lod@w3.org>" <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <387E72E216DF1247A2F8ED4819C93BA71E45B829@UOS-MSG00041-SI.soton.ac.uk>
Hi,
I agree with you about the Names - it's just I think that when people use the term Hyperlink it gives the wrong emphasis.

As to the LOD world, I can only sigh at your response.
I asked, but you still haven't mentioned, a single thing that anyone would recognise as an application.
For example, what are the "new mobile applications" (as you say) - just name a few, please.
I don't want to knock things, and I would love to be able to tell people about them as I do believe the technology can be awesome.
But I just want a bit of realism.
If all you can do is point at Dbpedia and the LOD cloud and talk about the "embrace of Linked Data principles", then we haven't come very far in terms of consumption, stunning as the achievements may be.
Please name applications!
Go on, you must be able to name one to support your view.
Best
Hugh

On 6 Jan 2013, at 22:36, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
 wrote:

> On 1/6/13 1:01 PM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
>> On 6 Jan 2013, at 17:26, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 1/5/13 6:45 PM, Giovanni Tummarello wrote:
>>> 
>> <snip>
>>> BTW -- the killer application of the Web is the Hyperlink. That will remain so forever. Over time it will simply be used expose many more dimensions of Web exploitation.
>> Actually it's the global identifier.
> 
> Actually, the Hyperlink as a global identifier that can denote anything :-)
> 
>> I think it is misleading to talk about the hyperlinks as being the crucial technology - as you say later, it is the names that are important.
> 
> The Names are most useful when they resolve to descriptions of their Referents.
> 
>> You can have the identifiers without the hyperlinks, but if you talk about hyperlinks people think about where the link is from, which isn't the important bit.
> 
> The important bit lies in the Name and Address duality which enables powerful indirection via explicit or implicit redirection . This feature works wonders for:
> 
> 1. data representation
> 2. data access & connectivity
> 3. data integration
> 4. data dissemination
> 5. data management.
> 
>>>> On the web it is indeed often sufficient to
>>>> create a web site even a crappy one and you get immediate benefits.
>>>> Given there are benefits people do it, period.
>>>> 
>>>> IMO a client is missing. or a set of clients, that will do useful
>>>> things for non fictional - important enough share of people.
>>> No, we already have clients and consumers such as: Web browsers, legacy desktop applications, new mobile applications, and existing services that can all tap in to the data representation, access, integration, and dissemination frontiers that constitute the Web's data space dimension.
>> I think you need to substantiate your statement (that the project is already success) by providing a significant list of such real applications that use published Linked Data that they didn't create themselves.
> 
> DBpedia, LOD Cloud, the full embrace of Linked Data principles across the EU, US, UK, Italian, Spanish, Greek, Portuguese and many others governments is healthy enough. That's just for starters.
> 
> Publishing Linked Data is a resounding success, its has already long past the point of critical mass.
>> And please remember that this is the LOD list, so they should be consuming RDF from elsewhere by using resolvable URIs.
> 
> Yes, as my claims stand.
> 
>> (I find it hard to do so - the only real stuff I know of that isn't from Giovanni or I is in the Life Science world, as David rightly points out.)
> 
> Wow, so we clearly see the world differently. The items I listed above clearly don't count in your world view, for whatever reasons.
> 
>> 
>> In my mind this discussion is not directly about whether the LOD project is a success or failure - it is about where the valuable resources of some very bright people should be deployed.
> 
> People should participate in those aspects of the Linked Data ecosystem that best suite their skills and interests. Linked Data isn't a monolithic realm.
> 
>> And some of us would say that encouraging them to put their efforts into the publishing end is not the optimal strategy.
> 
> See my comment above. As I've said in the past, this realm is "horse for courses" compliant, and (IMHO) that's its ultimate strength.
> 
> 
> Kingsley
>> Best
>> Hugh
>>> Do you know of any serious application or service that exists today that's incapable of making a basic HTTP GET?
>>> 
>>>> With said clients (giving benefits already when accessing a few marked
>>>> up websites, e.g. something that allows you to use rottentomatoes.com
>>>> much better because of the markup that's ALREADY on it) then it willbe
>>>> PEOPLE writing to webmasters saying "mark it up please otherwise i
>>>> cant XY"or webmasters themselves wanting to mark up because then
>>>> people with clients willbe able to XY.
>>> Hyperlinks are powerful names for accessing Knowledge, Information, and Data. It just so happened that Web revelation happened via the information space, and now we have to backtrack to the data space en route to the knowledge space (where smart agents will thrive) dimension :-)
>>> 
>>> By every measure I know, Linked Data, LOD etc.. are resounding successes.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Kingsley
>>>> Gio
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 11:44 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
>>>>> I don't agree that the idea of "publish some stuff and they will come,
>>>>> both new publishers and consumers" has failed.  But I do think some
>>>>> expectations have been too high.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Perhaps it is like a scale-free distribution.  Sure, there is lots of
>>>>> data that is published and ignored, just as there are millions of
>>>>> personal blog sites on the web that are ignored.  But there is also some
>>>>> data that is published and is very valuable to Real Applications, just
>>>>> as sites like http://www.nytimes.com/ are valuable to many readers.
>>>>> Biological / life sciences data comes to mind.  It is not always 5-star
>>>>> -- often 4-star or only 3-star:
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html
>>>>> 
>>>>> One would be foolish to think that one's personal blog would be useful
>>>>> to many others just because it is published on the web.  Similarly one
>>>>> would be foolish to think that one's data would be useful to others
>>>>> merely because it is published as Linked Data.  But blogs and datasets
>>>>> need to be published before consumers can decide which of them are
>>>>> valuable, so I think it's good to keep encouraging data publication.
>>>>> 
>>>>> David
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Fri, 2013-01-04 at 21:18 +0000, Hugh Glaser wrote:
>>>>>> Wow Giovanni.
>>>>>> I wrote the following this afternoon, and have been sitting trying to
>>>>>> work out whether I should send it.
>>>>>> I think it means you are not alone in your views!:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm going to sound like a broken record here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> All well and good, yes it would be great to have the Dogfood server
>>>>>> working properly.
>>>>>> But (to push the analogy further), is there any point in making
>>>>>> DogFood if there are no dogs eating it?
>>>>>> Is this really what all these clever people should be spending their
>>>>>> time on?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I knew Dogfood wasn't in a very good state because I get error reports
>>>>>> when my system accesses it.
>>>>>> But did anyone else notice?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm so sad (yes really!) that after all these years people still run
>>>>>> around getting excited about publishing data, and fiddling with little
>>>>>> things, and yet it seems there is hardly a system that does any
>>>>>> significant consumption (of any third party data).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best
>>>>>> Hugh
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 4 Jan 2013, at 21:02, Giovanni Tummarello <giovanni.tummarello@deri.org>
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> One might just simply stay silent and move along, but i take a few
>>>>>>> seconds to restate the obvious.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> It is a fact that Linked data as " publish some stuff and they will
>>>>>>> come, both new publishers and consumers" has failed.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The idea of putting some "extra energy" would simply be useless per se
>>>>>>> BUT it becomes  wrong when one tries to involve others e.g. gullible
>>>>>>> newcomers,  fresh ph.d students who trust that "hey if my ph.d advisor
>>>>>>> made a career out of it, and EU gave him so much money it must be real
>>>>>>> right?"
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> IAs community of people who claim to have something to do with
>>>>>>> research (and not a cult) every once in a while is learn from the
>>>>>>> above lesson and devise NEW methods and strategies. In other words,
>>>>>>> move ahead in a smart way.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am by no mean trowing all away.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> * publishing structured data on the web is already a *huge thing* with
>>>>>>> schema.org and the rest. Why? because of the clear incentive SEO.
>>>>>>> * RDF is a great model for heterogeneous data integration and i think
>>>>>>> it will explode in (certain) enterprises (knowledge intensive)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What we're seeking here is more advanced, flexible uses of structured
>>>>>>> data published, e.g. by smart clients, that do useful things for
>>>>>>> people.
>>>>>>> The key is to show these clients, these useful things. What other
>>>>>>> (realistic) incentive can we create that make people publish data? how
>>>>>>> would a real "linked data client" work and provide benefit to a real
>>>>>>> world, non academic example class of users (if not all?) .
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> my wish for 2013 about linked data is that the discussion focuses on
>>>>>>> this. With people concentrated on the "full circle, round trip"
>>>>>>> experience, with incentives for all (and how to start the virtuous
>>>>>>> circle).
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Gio
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:03 PM, William Waites <ww@styx.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> hmmm.... not so tasty:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>    warning: array_keys() [function.array-keys]: The first argument should
>>>>>>>>    be an array in
>>>>>>>>    /var/www/drupal-6.22/sites/all/modules/dogfood/dogfood.module on
>>>>>>>>    line 1807.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> digging deeper:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>    The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
>>>>>>>>    The proxy server could not handle the request POST /sparql.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>    Reason: DNS lookup failure for: data.semanticweb.org
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>    Apache/2.2.3 (Debian) DAV/2 SVN/1.4.2 PHP/5.2.0-8+etch16 mod_ssl/2.2.3
>>>>>>>>    OpenSSL/0.9.8c Server at data.semanticweb.org Port 80
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> (appears to be a reverse proxy at data.semanticweb.org)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I think I prefer people food...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> -w
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> David Booth, Ph.D.
>>>>> http://dbooth.org/
>>>>> 
>>>>> Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
>>>>> reflect those of his employer.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Kingsley Idehen	
>>> Founder & CEO
>>> OpenLink Software
>>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
>>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Kingsley Idehen	
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 6 January 2013 23:01:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:45 UTC