W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Take 2: How To Do with deal with the Subjective Matter of Data Quality?

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 15:26:06 -0400
Message-ID: <4D9F614E.20302@openlinksw.com>
To: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
CC: Deborah MacPherson <debmacp@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net" <dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
On 4/8/11 2:25 PM, Frank Manola wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2011, at 7:45 PM, Deborah MacPherson wrote:
>
>> I think data quality conforms to metrics and repeatable processes.
> Now we're getting somewhere!  Certainly one key to dealing with "the subjective matter of data quality" is to start to make data quality issues more *objective*.

Yes, and go one step further by making the *objectivity* part of the 
data. Basically, discussion/conversation/debates about the data should 
be part of the zeitgeist of any Data Object or collection of Data Objects.

>   Everyone can have their own opinion about what constitutes quality, but in the Web of linked data those opinions should be documented, in the form of metadata on evaluation criteria, metrics, processes, etc. (PICS anyone?) associated with the data.

Yep! As stated above.

>   Even if there isn't agreement on what those criteria, etc. are, there would be a better basis for grappling with the disagreements.

Agreeing to Disagree is one of the most powerful aspects of the Web and 
the emerging Web of Linked Data :-)

>
>


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
President&  CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 19:26:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:42 GMT