W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org > March 2010

Re: TMO: Please provide feedback on User Interaction Storyboard

From: conor dowling <conor-dowling@caregraf.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:26:21 -0700
Message-ID: <w2sfdad151a1003311026xe2569f1bvc2f91ccedbf38c26@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Miller <subscriptionbox@squishymedia.com>
Cc: "Andersson, Bo H" <Bo.H.Andersson@astrazeneca.com>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
not to belabor the point but Eric's spot on - "speak to the needs and
concerns of the target audience". In their language, about solving their
"data interoperability" problem. And one other thing, we must contrast
linked-data to the alternative(s) on offer. Nothing exists in a vacuum.
There is clarity in opposition.

To get even "crasser" than Eric! - this is a competition. In three or four
years, will hospitals, clinics, doctors, pharma exchange data in big blobs
of XML pushed over SOAP and queried with schema-specific RPCs or will they
access SPARQL/SPARUL endpoints? Will SPARQL/OWL be left to academia, be
another future never widely adopted, as OSI networking was in the 90s (I'm
old!), or will it sweep XML aside, at least for querying data?

I spoke to a CIO a while ago who proudly told me that his chain had adopted
SOA. His would be a clean world of XML and its schemas. Why is he wrong?

Conor

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:13 AM, Eric Miller <
subscriptionbox@squishymedia.com> wrote:

> I really like the simplicity and clarity of this explanation.  Thanks
> Conor.
>
> So, given this explanation of where the most value can be found in adoption
> of semantic web technologies...who are we trying to convince?  My guess is
> (a) IT systems architects and (b) those in a management position who would
> consider and/or greenlight this kind of work.  Yes?  No?  And what do we
> need to communicate to each audience in order to demonstrate the value?
>
> I realize this is a pilot project to demonstrate the value; what I'm
> wanting to do here is get a better idea of what we should focus our limited
> resources on in order to best demonstrate the value.  So if we're really
> trying to convince (say) hospital CIOs to adopt SW technologies, we'll be
> working to make sure our work highlights the efficiencies to be had by
> avoiding the interoperability middleware costs described by Conor.
>
> Apologies if this approach strikes some as overly commercial or pragmatic,
> but personally I'm really trying to get at  _exactly_ what we're proposing
> here and how we want to structure the proposal to speak to the needs and
> concerns of the target audience.   That's what the storyboard is really
> about.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Eric
>
> On Mar 30, 2010, at 6:05 PM, conor dowling wrote:
>
> Bosse,
>
> my two pence worth is to emphasize how linked data avoids the biggest
> problem of interoperability/federation etc. - gateways/translation code, the
> brittle crud strewn in every IT shop that costs so much to maintain.
>
> People have querying today (usually SQL). They have remote access
> techniques (REST or SOAP now). This makes them dismiss plain SPARQL or its
> schema cousins. But all still face a "data linkage gap". And until linked
> data, only awkward, often procedural, mapping was available or else, data
> stayed isolated, in islands.
>
> In linked data, data comes translated or least, there is a clear and simple
> path to translation - add links. Then a query engine, if clever enough, can
> step through alternative meanings, assembling answers in the many forms
> different parties require. This is the biggest differentiator of linked-data
> (at least I think so).
>
> Conor
>
> p.s. I'll talk a little to this on the TMO 9am Thursday call when I walk
> through "Linked Data for VistA" - I put the slides here:
> http://esw.w3.org/Image:ThursdayTMOCall.pdf . BTW, I'm very interesting in
> linking this VistA work with your projects.
>
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Andersson, Bo H <
> Bo.H.Andersson@astrazeneca.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> To be able to progress the work with the TMO  user interface/interaction
>> we need your feedback on the storyboard.
>>
>>
>> TMO-UI wiki: http://esw.w3.org/HCLSIG/PharmaOntology/Interface
>>
>> Storyboard:
>> http://esw.w3.org/images/9/9b/HCLSIG%24%24PharmaOntology%24%24Interface%24translational_ontology_process_vB.pdf
>>
>>
>> Please send your feedback by Wednesday, March 31 at latest.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Bosse
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *Confidentiality Notice: *This message is private and may contain
>> confidential and proprietary information. If you have received this message
>> in error, please notify us and remove it from your system and note that you
>> must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Any
>> unauthorized use or disclosure of the contents of this message is not
>> permitted and may be unlawful.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 17:26:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:00:58 GMT