- From: Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:52:19 -0500
- To: David Huynh <dfhuynh@alum.mit.edu>, public-lod@w3.org
Hi David, David Huynh wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Well put! It's an accurate account of what's going on. As I explicitly > said in my original post, this was more or less a tease and shameless > self-promotion :-), but hopefully beneficial, as there are, in my > opinion, some interesting ideas from this query editor that can be > adopted / adapted. In fact, if you watch the screencast again, there > might be hints of "data driving interfaces", albeit only for developers, > not end-users. What other major wins at no cost are you seeing? OK; I'm game. This is a list Fred and I have not published before for "major wins": 1. Context-specific autocompletion 2. Context-specific dropdown lists 3. Instance record previews 4. Class (concept) previews 5. Instance record details 6. Class (concept) details 7. CRUD actions on all items (depending on authorization/access rights) 8. Label viewing/selection v IRIs 9. Item look-up/search (contextual, via label or IRIs) 10. Synonym/alias matching ("semsets") or lookup 11. Easy internationalization (viz labels) 12. Automatic inferencing 13. What's related lookup 14. More specific/more generic lookups 15. Local graph visualization 16. Full linkage navigation (linked data) 17. Contextual, directed work flows (query building, template building/selection, analysis, etc) 18. Contextual tooltips/popups 19. Contextual help 20. Dataset-level access and scope. I saw a few of the above in your system. I especially like your syntax tolerance, interactive tree ("one-by-one"), and "inside out" ideas. Very clever. There are many reasons why we think RDF the superior choice for all of these purposes [1]. In our own work, we also give great care to the separation of instances and their records (ABox) from conceptual schema (TBox), which, when using the same techniques above, also provides highly useful contextuality and targeted selections. For example, as a teaser, all instance types can be classified into discrete, disjoint "supertypes" that greatly aid disambiguation or display template selection [2]. These reasons are why we describe our stuff as "data-driven applications". Generic tools incorporating the ideas above can be contextually driven through simple swap outs of ontologies and domains. Indeed, ontology(ies) are what *actually* drives the system. IMO, from a consumer perspective, Fred's query builder when at Zitgist was the best I have seen [3]. That was two years ago, and we never commercialized it, but have taken some of those ideas forward with our current stuff. We have no issue with JSON as a naive authoring environment or for data exchange. Indeed, we view it as often superior to straight RDF. But, our internal, canonical representations are RDF as structured and organized above because we get all of these data-driven interface advantages "for free". We further can avoid all of the SEO problems of client-side JSON, a concern of mine going back to early work with the deep Web. I'd be interested in your or others' similar ideas. Mike [1] http://www.mkbergman.com/?p=483 [2] For example, see references to BBN or Sekine in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Named_Entity_Recognition [3] http://www.zitgist.com/products/query_builder.html > > David > > Mike Bergman wrote: >> This has been a classic case of Cool Hand Luke and a failure to >> communicate. Indeed, it happens all of the time in this forum. >> >> David comes from a perspective of usability and user interfaces, >> granted with a JS bias. Most all of us have recognized his genius for >> quite some time, and he is a leading innovator in such data presentation. >> >> Kingsley has been a passionate advocate for data connectivity and >> overcoming all things "silo". Middleware is his game (and OL's). >> Data and manipulating data is his perspective, and we know the >> superior infrastructure that his personal and then corporate >> commitments to these issues have brought. >> >> Benjamin notes today the difference in perspective. Does it begin >> with the user experience, or does it begin with the data? >> >> The answer, of course, is Yes. >> >> David with JSON and MQL and other things FB might be criticized. As >> he knows, I have done so personally offline and directly. >> >> Kingsley might be criticized for facile hand-waving at UI and >> usability questions; he, too, knows I have made those points privately. >> >> I truly don't know what our "community" really is or, if indeed, we >> even have one. But I do know this: >> >> All of us work on these issues because we believe in them and have >> passion. So, I have a simple suggestion: >> >> Keep looking outward. We need to talk and speak to the >> "unaffiliated". In that regard, David has the upper hand because >> presentation and flash will always be easier to understand for the >> non-cognescenti. But, David, you know this too: your job is easier >> if the nature of the data and its structure drives your display. >> >> There are HUGE, HUGE advantages of data driving interfaces and >> usability that neither of you are discussing. Let's next turn our >> attention there and gain some major wins at no cost. >> >> Mike >> >> >> David Huynh wrote: >>> Kingsley, >>> >>> Thanks for the resources and the detailed explanation! Looks like all >>> the pieces are there! >>> >>> David >>> >>> Kingsley Idehen wrote: >>>> David Huynh wrote: >>>>> Thanks for the link, Juan. >>>>> >>>>> Just curious, even if I know SPARQL, how do I (as a new user) know >>>>> which properties and types there are in the data? And what URIs to >>>>> use for what? >>>> David, >>>> >>>> Not speaking for Jaun, but seeking to answer the question you posed. >>>> >>>> Our iSPARQL interface takes the view that: >>>> >>>> 1. You lookup vocabularies and ontologies of interest before >>>> constructing triple patterns since the terms need to come from >>>> somewhere >>>> 2. You then you use the ontology/vocabulary tree to drag and drop >>>> classes over Subject and Object nodes >>>> 3. Do the same thing re. properties by selecting them and dropping >>>> them over the connectors (predicates) >>>> 4. Repeat the above until you've completely painted an SPO graph of >>>> what you seek. >>>> >>>> BTW - the pattern in steps 2-4 above originated from RDF Author, and >>>> we simply adopted it for SPARQL (following a skype session I had >>>> with Danbri years ago re. the need for SPARQL QBE). Note: RDF Author >>>> allowed you to write Triples directly into RDF information resources >>>> via their URLs. Which means the same UI works fine for SPARUL >>>> (writing to Quad Store via its internal Graph IRI or Web Information >>>> Resource URL). >>>> >>>> Links: >>>> >>>> 1. http://rdfweb.org/people/damian/RDFAuthor/Tutorial/ -- RDF Author >>>> >>>> Kingsley >>>>> >>>>> David >>>>> >>>>> Juan Sequeda wrote: >>>>>> You may want to check out a tool that we are working on: SQUIN >>>>>> >>>>>> http://squin.informatik.hu-berlin.de/SQUIN/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student >>>>>> Dept. of Computer Sciences >>>>>> The University of Texas at Austin >>>>>> www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com> >>>>>> www.semanticwebaustin.org <http://www.semanticwebaustin.org> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:18 PM, David Huynh <dfhuynh@alum.mit.edu >>>>>> <mailto:dfhuynh@alum.mit.edu>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> Admittedly this is somewhat of a tease and shameless >>>>>> self-promotion :-) but I think there are a few interesting >>>>>> concepts in the query editor for Freebase that I've been working >>>>>> on that can be very useful for querying and consuming LOD data >>>>>> sets: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.freebase.com/app/queryeditor/about >>>>>> >>>>>> Or maybe I missed it totally--is there anything similar for >>>>>> writing SPARQL queries over LOD? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> David > > >
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2009 14:53:08 UTC