W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > November 2008

Re: Can we afford to offer SPARQL endpoints when we are successful? (Was "linked data hosted somewhere")

From: Aldo Bucchi <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 18:45:10 -0300
Message-ID: <7a4ebe1d0811271345t74152f8crda78ee8e3e0242a9@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ian Dickinson" <ian.dickinson@hp.com>
Cc: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>

Ian,

After "10" years of debate the SW is finally giving birth to something
concrete or tangible.
I made reference to the concrete/abstract equation.

If this is public-lod, then let's create a users-lod and a dev-lod,
and let one stabilize.

Please, I am on the sales side and have been for years.
Java is easy to sell because you are talking low level details of
APIs, not macro business models.
( ok, you can say that standardizing the content repository api has a
business impact for day software, but its does not reshape the IT
industry ).

I agree on the debate, all I am saying is that there should be some
stability at the edge. This thread was originated when an apparent
newcomer asked for a way to use LOD ( which is what we all want to the
world to start asking for! ).

And look into what it turned.
Let's send a customer satisfaction survey and see how he now feels
about this ;) ( joke ).

Just pointing that out.

I was involved in both Java and flex from the beginning.
In fact, the very early days of flex, and have followed the process
with attention, contributing my grain of sand when possible.

I am tech savvy a salesman. I operate on that front.

Best,
A

On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Ian Dickinson <ian.dickinson@hp.com> wrote:
>
> Aldo Bucchi wrote:
>>
>> Take a look at Java conferences or Adobe MAX. How many times do these
>> guys question their decisions in public?
>> NONE.
>
> Um, Java Community Process?
>
> If you think that there has been no open discussion of the technical design
> decisions or business models or standardisation or control of the direction
> of either Java or Flex/Flash then you must be viewing the web through a very
> small aperture.
>
>> Because they know it is suicide to do so.
>> The dynamic that follows is more or less this:
>> "If XXX has room for doubts about tech YYY, and he knows so much more
>> than I do, then... why bother?"
> Any technology broad enough to be interesting has a community around it with
> a spectrum of opinion. You might equally well suppose that your customers
> would argue that any tech YYY that doesn't engender any difference of
> opinions is too narrowly supported to be commercially viable. Debate is a
> positive sign, not a negative one.
>
> Ian
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Ian Dickinson   http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Ian_Dickinson
> HP Laboratories Bristol          mailto:ian.dickinson@hp.com
> Hewlett-Packard Limited        Registered No: 690597 England
> Registered Office:      Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
>
>



-- 
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 Thursday, 27 November 2008 21:45:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:20:43 UTC