Re: Use machine-readable standardized data formats / Use non-proprietary data formats

hello all.

On 2015-08-14 10:25, Makx Dekkers wrote:
>> I'm trying not to rule out things like graph data.
>> I think 3D models are out of scope, whether of sculptures or molecules. If
> the
>> model is broken down into data, then it is in scope.
> To be clear, I wasn't talking about paper and glue 3D models, but about
> digital representations of objects and phenomena in space. How can you say
> that is not 'data'?

one person's model/reality is another person's data. trying to 
understand where to draw the line is a futile attempt with a long 
history of trying and failing. you either *define what to focus on* when 
dealing with data (we treat anything as data and simply aren't concerned 
with whatever "deeper understanding" somebody may have or want of it), 
or you will not be able to resolve this issue ever.

as one data (ha!) point: from a crawler's perspective, HTML surely is 
data, because they're not really concerned with "reading" the page; they 
simply look at it as a data point in full-text space that needs to be 
made accessible. so from a crawler's perspective, all the "web data" 
checkpoints make a lot of sense, because then it can crawl better 
(hypermedia!), index better (microformats!), and better figure out what 
to make available (machine-readable licenses!).

btw, the exact same problem appears when you try to separate data and 
metadata. one person's metadata is another person's data, so once again 
trying to "find the correct way to separate these" is a futile exercise.



erik wilde |  -  tel:+1-510-2061079 |
            | UC Berkeley  -  School of Information (ISchool) |
            | |

Received on Friday, 14 August 2015 14:42:36 UTC