- From: Mischa Tuffield <mmt04r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 18:40:02 +0100
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Cc: martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org, Denny Vrandecic <denny.vrandecic@kit.edu>, public-lod@w3.org
On 1 Apr 2010, at 17:58, Dan Brickley wrote: > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Martin Hepp (UniBW) > <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote: >> Hi Denny: >> Without spooling your All Fools' Day joke: I think it is a dangerous one, >> because there is obviously a true core in the expected criticism. >> >> I think that without any need, you give outsiders additional ammunition to >> confirm other outsiders' prejudices against the value of linked data. I bet >> you will find lots of triples in the current LOD cloud that have information >> value close to the triples in your "experiment". >> >> And many people communicating over the potential of the Web of Linked Data, >> and maybe deciding about business investments, will not see the joke in your >> page. > > On the contrary, I think it was both funny and healthy for the semweb community. I couldn't agree more, at first glance, I was super skeptical and even a tad annoyed, but seeing that it was Denny, and the fact that it was posted on 2010-04-01 put a massive smile on my face and made me burst out laughing. If anything it shows maturity in the techniques and the practise, showing how people can easily knock together such a compelling (prank of a) linked data service. Awesome... Mischa *looking forward to seeing more SW related april fools > My thought process when I carelessly saw the original blurb go past > was as follows: > > * oh dear, more overblown hype for some semweb thing, that's not good > * oh, it's quite stupid in fact > * ah it's Denny, and I like everything he makes ... and ah yeah 2010-04-01, phew > > The fact that I was even for a second prepared to entertain the idea > that this was serious, worries me. And clearly a few others on the > list went further before realising. Which is why I say this was a > healthy exercise. If we as a community are so used to over-hyped folly > that we could consider that this might have been a serious offering, > then we ought to take more care of our habits during the other 364 > days of the year. If I hadn't seen Denny's name against the project or > actually read the paper, I'd probably have been taken in too... > > If we can't laugh at ourselves, we'll be ill prepared to deal with > criticism. And criticism is healthy for any technology community, but > especially one whose ambitions are as large as ours. We are trying to > build a global, integrated system for planet-wide sharing of > descriptions of all things and their interconnections. Described like > that, it sounds like drug-addled idiocy, but that's what we're doing. > And the only way we'll manage it is if we do it in good humour. This > means acting gracefully when fans of other technologies offer > criticism, whether or not they are gentle in their words. And it means > taking care to balance enthusiasm for the potential of this technology > with a realisation that there's still a long way to go in making these > tools and techniques a joy for non-enthusiasts to use... > > cheers, > > Dan >
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 17:42:00 UTC