W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > July 2007

Re: Semantic Web Flyer

From: Martin Dzbor <M.Dzbor@open.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2007 17:43:12 +0100
Message-ID: <007001c7bd91$3f21b630$2f186c89@open.ac.uk>
To: "Dunja Ewinger" <de@webxcerpt.com>
Cc: "W3C SWEO IG" <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
Hi Dunja/all,

my opinions are in the text below (tried to also digest in the comments I had from colleagues and partners in my projects, so it's a kind of group reply):

1. type of flyer

-- when talking to people around, we thought the text was a bit too tech-oriented, so I would suggest going more toward the non-techie option (definitely on the first, second and partly third page)

-- so voting from this side would be:   gory technical = -1; mixture (say 75 non-tech + up to 25 tech) = +1; IT professionals but not SW a.k.a. "non-SW-technical) = +0.5

-- I would suggest completely avoiding anything gory, geeky... :-)

2. Title page   ...  option 2 +0.5 (see comments)

-- option 2 looks better to me, but maybe keep the colour scheme of the main headings a bit more aligned with the logo work, etc. (that green is a bit boring there)

-- if we use the catchphrase of "Data unleashed", the image scheme is not actually showing any unleashing, in fact no obvious "data", so maybe some kind of virtual transfer of some blurry information stream (annotated?) between the helix part and the PCB part would convey the notion of integration, unleashing more strongly?

3. Page 2   .... hot story  +1;   facts  -1

-- hot story, definitely... Lee's version's fine content-wise, but it contains a few complex terms that are probably used by professionals, but may seem a bit distracting to general public audience 

-- IMHO, what makes a story hot is a way to remember its point, its gist just by shallow scanning, without deep analysis... I know, easier said than done :-)

4. Data integration diagram     ....     Ivan's  +0.5  (but with some comments)

-- IMHO, the same applies as to point 1 above = what unleashes the data?

-- Ivan's version is kind of showing the idea of opening up information / data silos, linking the data and applying these new linkages, but again, maybe a specific "unleashed stream" shown as a background of the diagram would bring this point in...

-- you know those pictures showing an evolution line from a monkey thru some apes to the human -- if the designer can depict a similar "evolution" from siloed data like (using Ivan's layers):

DATA:     <symptom>blabla</symptom> >>> 
INTEGR:         IF ?symptom BUT NOT etc. THEN <assumption>blabla</assumption> >>>> 
ADDE VALUE:        "personalized medical diagnosis" (say, Jane's got hayfever, John a flu....)

-- another point re details; the two options you propose (KB integration vs. Web extension) are both valid = the former is more appealing to corporate user, the latter to the average Joe browsing the Web

-- in a way, they describe the two main audiences that can benefit from the SW technologies, so for me it doesn't make sense to choose only one = SW is a new way of publishing information AND a means to open up KB/DB silos

5. Layer cake    ...     -1

-- personally, no, don't add it to the flyer... without explanation is too abstract, the same point can be conveyed thru a diagram mentioned in point 4 much more effectively and in the language of the IT/CIO/CTO audience rather than in the language of SW researcher, logician or programmer

OK, I guess I better finish here... :-)

            Martin Dzbor, PhD., MBA
            Knowledge Media Institute
Walton Hall, Milton Keynes  MK7 6AA, UK

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dunja Ewinger 
  To: W3C SWEO IG 
  Sent: 03 July 2007 15:46
  Subject: Semantic Web Flyer

  Dear SWEOs,

  first of all: thank you all for the feedback and input you have given to the flyer. I discussed them all with Paula and we came to the conclusion that we got enough comments to finalize the flyer pretty soon. To do so we would require some decisions on issues, listed below.

  Please tell us your opinion no later than the 10th of July (Tuesday). We will than present the "least common denominator" at the telcon in order to move quickly to the finalization.

  Thanks for your support

  Best regards,

  1. Type of flyer (technical, non-technical, a mixture)

  What do we want? Jeffrey has been so kind to list the options. Please vote with -1 (negative), 0 (neutral), or 1 (positive).

  a. It might be worth while to product two flyers, one for the technical side, one for the non-technical side. Each of the two flyers should be visually similar to the other. They could have similar layout, but from a distance be different, say, by background color. Only upon reading them would you see that one would have the specialist content, the other would address the average person. 

  b. Maybe the 1st page or 2 could be the 'executive summary', followed by gory, geeky details. 

  c. As you see with multiple languages sometimes -- have it printed on 2 sides. One side is the overview, the other (which is sometimes printed upside down to distinguish it) be the technical info.

  2. Title page

  Which draft do you prefer?

  Please note: The grid will be removed or modified and the slogan "Data unleashed" will be included by the designer.

  3. Page 2

  We have 2 options for the second page: either a "hot story" or a general statement. Please vote with -1 (negative), 0 (neutral), or 1 (positive).

  a. "hot story" - please see Lee's version (which is also the latest) here: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/group/wiki/Semantic_Web_Flyer/Hotstories

  The idea here is to "catch" people by giving them a good story that shows that the Semantic Web can solve problems and makes life easier. The story needed to be on a general (every-day-life) level to address everyone.

  b. a simple statement underneath the title question "What is the Semantic Web" similar to the definitions on the W3C activity page (http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/)

  Ann and Leo gave some good input on that. We are currently working on a suitable text based on these ideas.

  4. Page 3 

  Title: Web of data. 
  Currently we have 3 diagrams on Data Integration. All of them would need to be improved by the designer:

  Which one is the most suitable, so to say the one that expresses most the "Web of Data"- aspect? Please vote with -1 (negative), 0 (neutral), or 1 (positive).

  We have 2 kinds of additional information to the image. Which one do you like more?

  a. A Web of connected knowledge bases.  
  Contextualize the use of data by using ontologies. 
  Retrieval of information through a unified query interface,
  ... regardless how and where data is stored. 
  Reasoning with data and offering different views over the data.

  b. An extension of the current web
  .it is based on XML, 
  and standardizes how you can publish and access information. 
  Your existing data sources, web content management, intranet systems or database systems, can be connected based on web technology and RDF. 
  This reduces integration costs and simplifies the IT landscape, like the RSS success story has already shown. 

  Additionally to the image we have the testimonials and other application fields.

  5. Page 4

  Do you think it would be good to put in the Semantic Web layer cake including the definitions?


  Do you have anything to add (comments, use case.)?

Dunja Ewinger

Technology Transfer & Awareness, EU Network of Excellence REWERSE
Tel.: +49 89 548 088 48 
Email: de@webXcerpt.com
REWERSE is member of the W3C SWEO Interest Group http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/sweo/

webXcerpt Software GmbH
Aurbacherstr. 2
D-81541 München

Geschäftsführer: Tim Geisler, Dr. Heribert Schütz
Firmensitz München
Handelsregister München HRB 134213
Ust-IdNr.: DE212843019

UPCOMING: Semantic Web Days @ I-Semantics 2007
5-7 September in Graz, Austria
Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2007 16:43:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:57 UTC