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

On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
> Thanks Aldo.
> Interesting points.
> However..
>
> On 27/11/2008 16:47, "Aldo Bucchi" <aldo.bucchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> A simple metadata on this therad, from my POV.
>> I am obviously missing some more thorough analysis.
>> What I intend to show is just how this discussions usually tend to be
>> too broad and get dispersed.
>>
>> I asked a colleague ( he is a PhD, very smart guy ) to tell me what he
>> thinks. He's pretty much in line with me.
>>
>> * Hugh is worried about *why* would anyone go through the problems of
>> publishing their data and points out some problems
> Sorry, I must have misled you.
> I take as an absolute working hypothesis that when people (including me)
> publish their data, we will get fascinating emergent properties the like of
> which we can only dimly guess at.
> I will be very unhappy to see this hypothesis disproved (if that is
> possible), but am working with might and main to try to avid that outcome.
> I have published a lot of data, and kept hacking the system to conform to
> the latest LOD best practice (even when I have felt it was not necessarily
> the best way to proceed).
> I would guess that the majority of people on this lost have a similar view,
> since this is not the place I expect people who have rejected the hypothesis
> to feel comfortable.
>
> I can't think of what I said that gave you such a negative impression, and
> am sorry I did, because it doesn't help to have such misunderstandings.
>
> I do, however, think it is useful to discuss possible barriers to the
> exciting new world we are all trying to build. That is what I think thi list
> is for.

( sorry I am copying this, sent it in private )

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


>
> Hope that helps the interactions.
> Best
> Hugh
>
>



-- 
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 21:55:15 UTC