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

Juan Sequeda wrote:
> Hugh and all,
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 3:14 PM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk 
> <mailto:hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>> wrote:
>
>
>     Clearly the answer was no, as I have had no other responses.
>
> I say yes, but most probably if it did exist right now, it wouldn't be 
> used.
>
>
>     I am still worried (as I guess Aldo is) that we do not have a
>     support forum for plain users.
>
> I wonder why?
>
>
>     (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.
>
> EXACTLY!!!!! This is the whole chicken and egg problem.
>
> I ask myself every day... who is going to use linked data? And lets 
> get all the LODers and SemWebers out of the picture. Now lets ask 
> ourselves again, who is going to use this data? Who is this data for? 
> Or furthermore, what is LOD? This is where we have to start! I think 
> that this community needs to start putting themselves in the shoes of 
> the "web2.0" developers! We need to start some kind of outreach and 
> education pipeline. Personally, I have started this with the community 
> of developers in Austin. In conjunction with the Cyc Foundation, we 
> founded Semantic Web Austin [1], as a way to teach/expose Semantic Web 
> technologies. We are planning to do WebOfData Workshops, bring keynote 
> speakers, and just get the community excited about LOD, what it is, 
> and HOW to USE it! Furthermore, this is one of the main motivations of 
> SQUIN [2], so a simple web developer can use LOD without any 
> complications. The transition needs to be nice and simple.
>
> Another thing that I ask myself is who is going to start LODizing new 
> data. The outreach and education part should encourge companies who 
> are exposing their data through API's to start doing it as Linked Data 
> too! But they never will if they don't even know what LOD is. An 
> interesting case is Jinni.com, a "semantic web" application. I 
> contacted the CEO, and to my surprise, they don't use any semantic web 
> technologies and don't even know what LOD is! The application and data 
> is awesome, and they just released an API. I envision a future when 
> companies release their API's and their Linked Data too!
>
> [1] www.semanticwebaustin.org <http://www.semanticwebaustin.org>
> [1] http://squin.sourceforge.net/
>
>
>     And then they need to know they can get support from somewhere.
>
>
> Once they know what LOD is, and how they can start using it, this list 
> will be useful!
>
>
>     If anyone has any suggestions or can point me at something I have
>     missed that would be great.
>
>
> My two cents! Would love to here comments!

Juan,

Let's go through some simple QA.
You play the "User" and I (and hopefully others will provide answers) 
will provide answers.

Mission: simple articulation of the value prop. of Linked Data.

Warning: Cognitive Dissonance is the viper in the sand re. this quest.



Kingsley

>
>
>     Best
>     Hugh
>
>
>     On 28/11/2008 16:39, "Aldo Bucchi" <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com
>     <mailto:aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Hugh,
>
>     On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk
>     <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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.
>
>
>


-- 


Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com

Received on Friday, 5 December 2008 21:52:32 UTC