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

Re: [Information Gathering] next steps: syndication, good weblocation

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2007 11:45:01 -0400
Message-ID: <460E81FD.4000406@openlinksw.com>
CC: public-sweo-ig@w3.org

Lee Feigenbaum wrote:
> Kingsley Idehen wrote on 03/30/2007 09:51:21 AM:
>   
>> Leo Sauermann wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi Information Gatherers,
>>>
>>> I thought about how to proceed with the user-interface for visualizing 
>>>       
>
>   
>>> the integrated data, looking at the discussing.
>>>
>>> It seems the effort to do the syndication is manageable, as Kingsley 
>>> has proven by implementing the aggregation already.
>>> We should focus on the format that we want people to make their data 
>>> sources available in. Once the data format is settled, and Kingsleys 
>>> integration works, we setup a website on some W3C URL related to SWEO 
>>> to make it accessible.
>>> And we can then encourage independent 3rd parties to aggregate the 
>>> data and provide the interface
>>>
>>> I asked Susie for her thoughts about this and she proposes exactly 
>>> this, stick to information gathering.
>>>
>>> Making a web interface that is user-friendly (especially newbie 
>>> friendly) and is managed by W3C is tricky, because W3C is a technology 
>>>       
>
>   
>>> standardization body and not an education body. We all agree that the 
>>> data has to be under an open license and that anyone can visualize it.
>>> So we will focus our efforts on syndication of data and providing a 
>>> stable SPARQL endpoint for the data + download facilities (and an RSS 
>>> feed).
>>> To decide on this, I would propose now to drop the portal ideas for 
>>> now. Anybody who wants can make a portal, if members of SWEO want to 
>>> make one, thats a new task force. (to concentrate our energy)
>>>
>>> (please give feedback)
>>>
>>> best
>>> Leo
>>>       
>
> I'm afraid that I have to strongly disagree with this. While information 
> gathering is an important prerequisite, I don't think that it, on its own, 
> really contributes to education or to outreach about the Semantic Web. 
> With data streams of relevant resources, I'm only a bit closer to being 
> able to start to educate my non-SW-believing friends, family, and 
> coworkers than I was previously. 
>
> As I guess I've said in the past, for me the real value comes when we have 
> an interface that can be sliced and diced for various audiences, and that 
> highlights the most accessible, accurate, and effective resources that the 
> SW community has to offer.
>
> I must apologize for the fact that I haven't found the time and energy to 
> speak up before now (especially after volunteering for the IG task), but I 
> do think it would be a big mistake for SWEO not to proceed further along 
> this path. I think that the aggregated data sources is a great first step, 
> but without augmenting it with some way to identify the best-of-breed 
> resources and to attach facets to various resources (what type of 
> resource, what level of fmailiarity is assumed, what type of audience, is 
> the resource slanted to a particular industry) and then without exposing 
> this in a user-friendly fashion, I think we've actually accomplished very 
> little.
>
> I will try my best to put my time where my words are, and--if anyone else 
> agrees with me on this, of course--I'll be happy to spearhead an effort to 
> make use of this data in the way that I see fit. While a single individual 
> can produce the type of user-interface I'm picturing (and even generate 
> the classification data), the ranking bit of my vision requires the 
> agreement and participation of a larger group of us. So if the group feels 
> that our time is best spent elsewhere, I've spoken my piece and will let 
> it rest. :-)
>
>   
>> Also remember that Exhibit and other Rich Internet Applications oriented 
>>     
>
>   
>> tools also benefit from the fact that most SPARQL Endpoints support JSON 
>>     
>
>   
>> serialization of results.
>>     
>
> Big thumbs-up to this point. SPARQL + exhibit is exactly the type of 
> approach I'm picturing to building an interface for this data. (Though 
> I've been playing with exhibit recently, and it may not be exactly what 
> we're looking for. It's very close, though.)
>   
Lee,

I don't think Leo is as far apart from your view as the commentary my imply.

As you know, there are a plethora of routes to building intuitive 
front-ends to RDF once there is you have SPARQL Endpoints. Personally, I 
would suggest (the position I've always held) that we all build 
front-ends to the SWEO aggregated RDF Data Sources. Ultimately, the same 
should also apply to the actual server collections, we should have RDF 
server mirrors from the likes of IBM and Oracle along the same lines as 
what OpenLink is offering (via the Virtuoso base RDF store). We have to 
practice what we preach at every turn, loose federation of RDF Data is 
an essential part of this bigger picture :-)

Once we have the SPARQL Endpoint live, please proceed in the manner 
you've suggested re. Exhibit. It would also be nice to see a Boca based 
host of the RDF data also.

To conclude, I violently agree!

Kingsley

> Lee
>  
>   
>> -- 
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Kingsley Idehen         Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>> President & CEO 
>> OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>   


-- 


Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Saturday, 31 March 2007 15:45:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:52 UTC