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

Re: Wiki page on RDF success stories? [was Re: Opening Walled Gardens: RDF / Linked Data as the Universal Exchange Language of Healthcare]

From: Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 14:40:02 -0500
Message-ID: <CAE9vqEG9BMco0LbboDM3aRLU5cvPBArTshXy-+F9AXPLXGJPaA@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Cc: RebholzSchuhmann <d.rebholz.schuhmann@gmail.com>, Joanne Luciano <jluciano@gmail.com>, public-semweb-lifesci <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>, Michel Dumontier <michel.dumontier@gmail.com>, Conor Dowling <conor-dowling@caregraf.com>, Rafael Richards <rmrich5@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 12:41 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 11:24 -0500, Tom Morris wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 9:34 AM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote:
> [ . . . ]
>> > Yes, we decided that we simply didn't have time to write a long document
>> > that more fully explained the benefits [of RDF].
>>
>> I think the argument would be greatly strengthened by proof points to
>> support the claims.  They don't need to be long and elaborate.  They
>> could be at the top level like "The steel industry switched from SL7
>> to RDF and cut their costs by 50% in 18 months," or to support a
>> specific claim such as "RDF is web scale as evidenced by the fact that
>> it's the primary information format used by Google, Bing, and Yandex."
>>
>> [Note, those are made up examples.  Replace them with real proof
>> points from industries which have already switched to RDF.]
>
> I agree.  Actual success stories would be the most convincing.  Hmm, is
> there a W3C wiki page somewhere, that collects links to RDF success
> stories?  If not, maybe we should make one.  I'm imagining something
> like the RDF Tools wiki page, which is database driven (I think using
> the Semantic MediaWiki extension, but I could be wrong), so that one can
> list tools by various categories:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Tools
> For example, here is a list of tools in the "Triple Store" category:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Category:Triple_Store
>
> For RDF success story links I am imagining capturing attributes like:
>  - URL of RDF success story
>  - Brief description (one sentence)
>  - Field, Industry or Application category
>  - Positives observed
>  - Negatives observed
>
> This would make it a lot easier to point to success stories when writing
> or presenting about RDF.   What do others think?  Should we make a wiki
> page like this for links to RDF success stories?  Would those be the
> right fields to capture?  (Simple is best, because they need to be
> concisely displayable.)

There are the case studies at
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/public/UseCases/ which could be used as
a starting point.
Also http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/public/UseCases/slides/Slides.pdf

Although both use cases and case studies are included, it's really the
latter which would be most useful.

Tom
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2013 19:40:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:01:17 GMT