W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Adding back the essence of the Stone Soup analogy to the Benefits section

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:35:27 -0700
Message-ID: <20110822083527.11374w0heriknupr@kcoyle.net>
To: public-xg-lld@w3.org
Ross, I think the "one sentence" was a challenge, not a realistic  
expectation :-)

I tried taking out some of the statements that people might see as  
"negative" (e.g. "very little to provide"):

Another powerful outcome of the reuse of these unique identifiers is
that it allows data providers to contribute portions of their data as
statements.  Under our
current document-based ecosystem, data exchange is always in the form  
of entire records,
which are presumed to be complete descriptions.
   In a graph-based architecture, however,
an organization can supply individual statements
about a resource, and all statements provided about a particular
uniquely identified resource can be aggregated into the global graph.
For example, libraries can contribute authoritative names apart from the
full bibliographic description, and this can be used by others. At the same
time, library services could accept statements from other sources, as
they do today when they take in book cover images from outside services. In a
linked data ecosystem, there is literally no contribution too small
and it is this attribute that makes it possible for important
connections to come from previously unknown of sources.

a suggestion
kc

Quoting Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>:

> Hi all, in the last conf call I was given an action to figure out a
> way to incorporate the "essence" of the Stone Soup analogy (which was
> clearly causing problems for people) into something more palatable.
> The charge was to do it in a sentence -- I failed at one sentence, but
> here's a paragraph I'm proposing for people to distill and wordsmith:
>
> <current_text>
> By using globally unique identifiers to designate works, places,
> people, events, subjects, and other objects or concepts of interest,
> memory institutions allow resources to be cited across a broad range
> of data sources and thus make their metadata descriptions more richly
> accessible. The Web's Domain Name System assures stability and trust
> by putting these identifiers into a regulated and well-understood
> ownership and maintenance context. This is fully compatible with the
> long-term mandate of memory institutions. Libraries, and memory
> institutions generally, are in a unique position to provide trusted
> metadata for resources of long-term cultural importance as data on the
> Web.
> </current_text>
> <added_paragraph>
> Another powerful outcome of the reuse of these unique identifiers is
> that it allows data providers to contribute statements about
> resources, even if they only have very little to provide.  Under our
> current document-based ecosystem, it is not efficient for
> organizations that only know a fact or two about a given resource to
> publish it; the host institution has a relatively useless metadata
> record and consumers must devise ways of discovering, identifying and
> integrating these statements.  In a graph-based architecture, however,
> there is no downside to an organization supplying anything they can
> about a resource, since all statements provided about a particular
> uniquely identified resource aggregate into the global graph.  In a
> linked data ecosystem, there is literally no contribution too small
> and it is this attribute that makes it possible for important
> connections to come from the unlikeliest of sources.
> </added_paragraph>
>
> Thanks!
> -Ross.
>
>



-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Monday, 22 August 2011 15:36:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 22 August 2011 15:36:07 GMT