- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:02:08 -0400
- To: public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
Giovanni Tummarello wrote: > +1 thanks Nathan for pointing this out, very very relevant. > "luckly" so far it seems a bit too rooted in MS stack of things (just > looking at it very very superficially) :-)? > > Gio > > >> ps: realistically there's the whole microsoft thing to keep in the back >> of our minds; they have pretty much a semi-proprietary full end to end >> of most of the above, from M through OData through Pivot via silverlight >> and seadragon - and realistically by 2011 this will be starting to take >> off in a big way; there is a chance "linked data" could miss the boat >> and become nothing more than legacy data which people transform in to >> odata then use on the (by then) well supported and rolled out tech stack. >> >> pps: google are pushing in this direction too, it won't be long before >> we get a big surprise from their end (gdata + openid + oauth + >> gmail/buzz-additions + chromium-os + chrome + android + comparatively >> unlimited resources and thousands of amazing developers + a huge >> developer community) >> >> regardless of what anybody says, these two companies will push there own >> versions of what we're doing out within the next 12-18 months, with full >> developer support. >> >> please do remember I'm a huge linked data fan & have my interests firmly >> planted in linked data + read/write web - just aware of the realities at >> hand. >> >> regards! >> >> >> > > > All, Hopefully, you understand what Nathan is articulating (ditto Giovanni). If not, simply step back and as yourself a basic question: What is Linked Data About? Is it about markup? Is it about Data Access? Is it about a never ending cycle of subjective commentary and cognitive dissonance that serves to alienate and fragment a community that desperately needs clarity and cohesion. Experience and history reveal the following to me: 1. Standards based data access is about to be inflected in a major way 2. The EAV (Entity-Attribute-Value) graph model is the new focal point of Data Access (covering CRUD operations). Microsoft, Google, and Apple grok the reality above in a myriad of ways via somewhat proprietary offerings (this community should really learn to look closer via objective context lenses). Note, "proprietary" is going to mean less and less since their initiatives are HTTP based i.e., it's all about hypermedia resources bearing EAV model data representations -- with varying degrees of fidelity. Players and EAV approaches: 1. Microsoft -- OData (ditto using Atom+Feed extension based data representation) 2. Google -- GData (EAV with Atom+Feed based data representation) 3. RDF based Linked Data -- (RDF variant of EAV plus a plethora of data representation formats that are pegged to RDF moniker) 4. Apple -- Core Data (the oldest of the lot from a very proprietary company, this is basically a EAV store built using SQLite, until recently you couldn't extend the storage engine aspect) . Reality re. Business of Linked Data: "Data as a Service" (DaaS) is the first step i.e., entity oriented structured data substrate based on the EAV model. In a nutshell, when you have structured data place, data meshing replaces data mashing. Monikers aside, entrepreneurs, CTOs, and CIOs already grok this reality in their own realm specific ways. Microsoft in particular, already groks data access (they developed their chops eons ago via ODBC). In recently times, they've groked EAV model as mechanism for concrete Conceptual Model Level data access, and they are going unleash an avalanche of polished EAV based applications courtesy of their vast developer network. Of course, Google and Apple will follow suit, naturally. The LOD Community and broader Semantic Web Problem (IMHO): History is a very good and kind teacher, make it an integral part of what you do and the path forward becomes less error prone. A message that hasn't resonated thus far, in my personal experience. Today, I see a community rife with cognitive dissonance and desires to define a non existent "absolute truth" with regards to what constitutes an "Application" or "Killer Application". Ironically, has there never been a point in history where the phrase: Killer Application, wasn't retrospective? Are we going to miraculously change this, now? Has there ever been a segment in the market place (post emergence of Client-Server partitioning) where if you didn't make both the Client and the Server, the conclusion was: we have nothing? We can continue postulating about what constitutes an application, but be rest assured, Microsoft, Google, Apple (in that order), are priming up for precise execution with regards to opportunities in the emerging EAV based Linked Data realm. They have: 1. Polished Clients 2. Vast User Networks 3. Vast Integrator Networks 4. Vast Developer Networks 5. Bottom-less cash troves 6. Very smart people. In my experience, combining the above has never resulted in failure, even if the deliverable contains little bits of impurity. Invest a little more time in understanding the history of our industry instead of trying to reinvent it wholesale. As Colin Powell articulated re. the IRAQ war: If You Break The Pot, You Own It! Folks, we are just part of an innovation continuum, nothing is new under the sun bar, context !! -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
Received on Sunday, 11 April 2010 19:02:36 UTC