Re: Do we need another list(s)? Was "other things"

Clearly the answer was no, as I have had no other responses.
I am still worried (as I guess Aldo is) that we do not have a support forum for plain users.
(That is where they will feel welcome, able to ask damn fool questions, and nurtured.)
These are the people who actually might care nothing for our wonderful technologies, but simply want to use our amazing Linked Data, and that we need to bring into a community.
It may be that the wiki could help, but it doesn't at the moment.
To push the point more:
We are now doing tutorials on "How to Publish Linked Data...", which is great.
But we need to also do "How to Use Linked Data..." to people who know nothing, and don't really want to know much.
And then they need to know they can get support from somewhere.

If anyone has any suggestions or can point me at something I have missed that would be great.

Best
Hugh


On 28/11/2008 16:39, "Aldo Bucchi" <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Hugh,

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> Thanks Aldo,
> Very clear.
> I agree; what is the forum for users to ask some questions without getting
> dragged into the developer world?

Not sure if it exists at this point.
There is some intent behind the LOD wiki and very good material there,
but the lines are a bit blurry ( only a bit ).

> We could point them at the wiki, and the developing material on how to do
> things, but they still need to be able to ask questions.
> Ravinder asked a sensible question of the sort that should get a
> well-serviced response; he got some of that (eg I said "here are some SPARQL
> endpoints, have fun!"), but we then moved back into developer mode and had a
> discussion among ourselves. This is not the first time this has happened, I
> think.

Exactly!
That was the case I was trying to make.
Very well synthesized.

> And I suspect that quite a few existing list members are feeling the content
> is too detailed.
> It is very exciting that we should have got to the stage where we have this
> problem!

Aha!
And that's why I think it is sensible to act now, this is only going
to grow as a problem.

> You suggest lod-dev and lod-users
> Checking the W3 lists it seems they don't really have a standard way of
> splitting things. Similar situations:
> eg
>    public-owl-comments - This is the public feedback mailing list
>    public-owl-dev
>    public-owl-wg - Technical discussion of the OWL Working Group.
> Or
>    www-amaya - discussion about general issues of Amaya
>    www-amaya-dev - Technical discussion about Amaya.
>    www-amaya-developers
>    www-amaya-doc - Discussion among contributors
>
> I am not in favour of having many lists, nor changing names.
>
> So I think it would be a good idea to create a new list "public-lod-dev",
> and use public-lod for our users (should it be used for announcements as
> well?).

In the end, the only difference is that there should be some place
where people are simply served with practical answers and those who
know the technicalities keep them to themselves ( and have other
spaces to channel those debates ), unless prompted to delve deeper.

We have agreed on what LOD is, right?
There is a huge amount of LOD out there, right?
There are tools to use it, right?

If that's what we are saying out to the world, then questions like
Ravinder's should have a very simple answer as you say.
And should reassure him in his interest, not plant a 6 meter wall in
front of him.

> I guess that is a formal proposal, if the protocol allows me to do so.
> Any takers?

Heh. Me.

>
> How do we decide?
> I guess we wouldn't want to flood the list with yes/no/maybe.
> Someone can put out a simple message and then gather votes?
> I would be happy to, or does someone else want to?
> Feel free to email me privately with "yes please", "I'll do it" or "no
> don't".
> Sorry if I am out of order here, but let's get to a conclusion with minimum
> fuss.

Yeah, I don't know how to proceed either.
This is just another debate where we are pointing out an important issue.

There are others with more authority and insider knowledge that could
provide some guidance.

I would suggest calling the aforementioned case, the "R" case, in
allusion to the name of the user who asked the question.

So far, the R-Case is yet another example that has served to reveal a
flaw in the suitability of this list to receive the new markets we are
targeting with our outreach efforts ( markets will try to stand a bit
to the right of the value chain and don't really care what's going on
on the other side ).

( and if mr ravinder does care, then lets just create a fictional
character. he served the purpose well ;).

Best,
A

>
> Best
> Hugh
>
> On 27/11/2008 21:54, "Aldo Bucchi" <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hugh,
>>
>> Oh I am not saying you are against this, like anyone else in this
>> group you are evidently pushing this forward.
>> This is just a debate excercise right?
>>
>> Not trying to second guess your intentions.
>>
>> Please all I tried to point out is exactly that.
>>
>> We are using this list to debate in public.
>>
>> Do we want to debate in public?
>> If we do, perfect.
>> But beware that we are bouncing people off because, gee, take a look
>> at the level of the discussions!
>>
>> People just want to know what this big cloud of data is, what they can
>> get out of it, how to use it, etc.
>>
>> Or else we will fall back again into the SW obscure alley.
>>
>> I am risking getting bullied in the list for pointing this out, but I
>> think it is worth it.
>>
>> We are making some progress here in terms of world PR.
>>
>> Best,
>> A
>> --
>> Aldo Bucchi
>> U N I V R Z
>> Office: +56 2 795 4532
>> Mobile:+56 9 7623 8653
>> skype:aldo.bucchi
>> http://www.univrz.com/
>> http://aldobucchi.com
>>
>> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
>> This message is only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
>> addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If
>> you are not the intended recipient, please do not distribute or copy this
>> communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify us immediately
>> by
>> return e-mail.
>> INFORMACIÓN PRIVILEGIADA Y CONFIDENCIAL
>> Este mensaje está destinado sólo a la persona u organización al cual está
>> dirigido y podría contener información privilegiada y confidencial. Si usted
>> no
>> es el destinatario, por favor no distribuya ni copie esta comunicación, por
>> email o por otra vía. Por el contrario, por favor notifíquenos inmediatamente
>> vía e-mail.
>>
>
>



--
Aldo Bucchi
U N I V R Z
Office: +56 2 795 4532
Mobile:+56 9 7623 8653
skype:aldo.bucchi
http://www.univrz.com/
http://aldobucchi.com

PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
This message is only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If
you are not the intended recipient, please do not distribute or copy this
communication, by e-mail or otherwise. Instead, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail.
INFORMACIÓN PRIVILEGIADA Y CONFIDENCIAL
Este mensaje está destinado sólo a la persona u organización al cual está
dirigido y podría contener información privilegiada y confidencial. Si usted no
es el destinatario, por favor no distribuya ni copie esta comunicación, por
email o por otra vía. Por el contrario, por favor notifíquenos inmediatamente
vía e-mail.

Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 21:15:09 UTC