W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dwbp-comments@w3.org > March 2015

Re: "metadata" as "data about data"

From: Joćo Paulo Almeida <jpalmeida@ieee.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 13:55:11 -0300
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
CC: Christophe Guéret <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl>, Ralph Swick <swick@w3.org>, "public-dwbp-comments@w3.org" <public-dwbp-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D11E103B.9CD87%jpalmeida@ieee.org>
Dear Dan,

I don¹t see how the statement ³Dan Brickley works for Google² could be
interpreted as metadata in our definition (nor in other meaningful/useful
definition for metadata). Can you please clarify?

Joćo Paulo

On 5/3/15, 1:48 PM, "Dan Brickley" <danbri@google.com> wrote:

>On 5 March 2015 at 16:43, Joao Paulo Almeida <jpalmeida@ieee.org> wrote:
>> Would you please provide an example where the text we use could lead to
>> conceptual confusion?
>> I don't understand the disclaimer suggested by Dan. What is meant by
>> "absolute" distinction?
>The idea is that a statement like "Dan Brickley works for Google" is
>not inherently metadata versus data. It can be considered data, or
>considered metadata, depending on context and application. Therefore
>we should be careful not to give people the idea that there exists any
>deep important distinction between the two. In a 1990s context, this
>explained the very general approach taken in the RDF design. In the
>context of your document, the value is not so much that it would avoid
>conceptual confusion, but rather that it avoids presenting a
>(naturally) confusing distinction as a clear one.
>> best regards,
>> Joćo Paulo
>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com> wrote:
>>> On 5 March 2015 at 16:20, Christophe Guéret
>>> <christophe.gueret@dans.knaw.nl> wrote:
>>> > Hi Dan,
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for this! Funny thing is that I was sitting in a meeting with
>>> > people today and when I asked them to comment on our document they
>>> > pointed out that this definition of metadata would not fit everyone.
>>> Some debates are destined to go on forever :) Thanks for considering
>>> the suggestion...
>>> Dan
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2015 16:55:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:38:10 UTC