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: Mark <markw@illuminae.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 22:53:04 +0100
To: Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com>,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>
Message-ID: <bffc627d-24d7-447f-aff6-e31863826227@email.android.com>
Jerven from uniprot has a paper (accepted?  Not sure... At least submitted - he sent me the submission) where he details how RDF has made his life much much easier...  It may be worth knocking on his door for additional comment at least...

M



Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com> wrote:

>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 21:53:32 GMT

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