Re: twitter's annotation and metadata

Juan Sequeda wrote:
> This is all great stuff. So who can now go to Twitter and tell them 
> that their job has already been done...

We try the "many voices" approach :-)


Kingsley
>
> Juan Sequeda
> +1-575-SEQ-UEDA
> www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Kingsley Idehen 
> <kidehen@openlinksw.com <mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com>> wrote:
>
>     Chris Sizemore wrote:
>
>         the main problem is gonna be the cognitive dissonance over
>         whether a tweet is an information or non-information resource
>         and how many URIs are needed to fully rep a tweet...
>         so, who's gonna volunteer to publish the linked data version
>         of Twitter data, a la db/wiki[pedia] ...
>
>
>     Chris,
>
>     The Twitter Linked Data Space already exists in a variety of
>     fragments.
>
>     Twitter as a medium for nano annotations (nanotations) was always
>     an inevitability.
>
>     You would be surprised as to what you would FIND at:
>     http://uriburner.com/fct, on any given day, try it :-)
>
>     As for Information Resource, in the context of the burgeoning Web
>     of Linked Data, I believe Descriptor Resource is much clear. As
>     for non-information resource, we have a "Referent" and its Name
>     (via Generic HTTP URI).
>
>     "Resource" overloading will always thwart comprehension of Linked
>     Data.
>
>     Links:
>
>     1.
>     http://www.slideshare.net/kidehen/understanding-linked-data-via-eav-model-based-structured-descriptions
>     -- recent presentation that is basically "Linked Data" the prequel
>     via EAV Model focus (RDF as Data Model is not working, so lets
>     stopping banging on that since its generally perceived as a Markup
>     Language with a variety of Representation Formats)
>     2. http://twitpic.com/1g02q8/full -- Referent, Identifier, and
>     Description/Sense (The Data Perception Trinity)
>     3. http://twitpic.com/1g03vo/full -- Referent, Identifier, and
>     Descriptor/Sense Trinity as exploited via FOAF+SSL
>
>
>     -- 
>
>     Regards,
>
>     Kingsley Idehen       President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web:
>     http://www.openlinksw.com
>     Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>     <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>     Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>
>
>
>
>         best
>
>         Cs
>
>
>
>
>         On 16 Apr 2010, at 10:28 AM, "adasal" <adam.saltiel@gmail.com
>         <mailto:adam.saltiel@gmail.com> <mailto:adam.saltiel@gmail.com
>         <mailto:adam.saltiel@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
>             twitter have a hard task as they have to take into account
>             usage. The community have evolved their own, inconsistent,
>             usage - for instance this tweet
>             greenhaze <http://twitter.com/greenhaze> #ff
>             <http://twitter.com/search?q=%23ff> big up: @_Jameslloyd
>             <http://twitter.com/_Jameslloyd> @AlysFowler
>             <http://twitter.com/AlysFowler> @brightgreenscot
>             <http://twitter.com/brightgreenscot> @AskTheClimateQ
>             <http://twitter.com/AskTheClimateQ> @faisalislam
>             <http://twitter.com/faisalislam> @valerieoriordan
>             <http://twitter.com/valerieoriordan> @peopleandplanet
>             <http://twitter.com/peopleandplanet> @*38_degrees*
>             <http://twitter.com/38_degrees> @krishgm
>             <http://twitter.com/krishgm>
>             compared to
>             craftygreenpoet <http://twitter.com/craftygreenpoet> Quiz
>             party manifesto writers, Ed Miliband, Oliver Letwin and
>             Danny Alexander. Join in now http://bit.ly/9eYpSI
>             *#38degrees* <http://twitter.com/search?q=%2338degrees>
>             #ukelection <http://twitter.com/search?q=%23ukelection>
>
>
>             Notice the #ff hash tag and the phrase 'big up:' in the
>             first tweet as well as the many references (@ tags).
>             So a popular sign #ff has been invented and there are
>             different styles of posting, of drawing attention.
>             The developers of a name space might have to take all of
>             these issues into account, for instance the range of
>             intentions of posters of which 'drawing attention' may
>             just be one, or be a super set.  Or, alternatively, just
>             create a basic name space with a few, lose, defined entities?
>             I think that the problem would be to define a semantics
>             that allows users to continue to invent usage.
>             Or will invention be seen to peter out anyway as people
>             settle on a few useful 'tools' such as the #ff hash tag?
>
>             Of course, the other side of introducing semantics is that
>             it could increase the expressive scope of what is an
>             incredibly restricted format. But twitter might find that
>             counter productive. The restriction, which is a product of
>             a lack of common symbols that might be used knowingly to
>             extend it, is the mother of invention. Often that
>             invention lies in a sexual direction (or products or
>             money). With regard the sexual it extends into that realm
>             well because the mystery of not knowing is coupled with
>             the necessity to invent 'something' on top of what is
>             really a well known human area - the play of ambiguity
>             suits the subject matter making it seem racier than
>             perhaps it really is.
>
>             A formalism might destroy this though?
>
>
>             Best,
>
>             Adam Saltiel
>
>
>             On 16 April 2010 02:52, Juan Sequeda
>             <juanfederico@gmail.com <mailto:juanfederico@gmail.com>
>             <mailto:juanfederico@gmail.com
>             <mailto:juanfederico@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
>                Hopefully everybody has heard that Twitter will release
>             some
>                annotation feature which will allow to add metadata to
>             each tweet.
>
>                I just read this blog
>                post http://scobleizer.com/2010/04/15/twitter-annotations/
>
>                and the following caught my attention: "There aren’t
>             any rules as
>                to what can be in this metadata. YET. All the devs I’ve
>             talked to
>                say they expect Twitter to “bless” namespaces so the
>             industry
>                will have one common way to describe common things"
>
>                I'm just wondering what people here think about this.
>
>
>                Juan Sequeda
>                +1-575-SEQ-UEDA
>                www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com>
>             <http://www.juansequeda.com>
>
>
>          
>         http://www.bbc.co.uk
>         This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may
>         contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC
>         unless specifically stated.
>         If you have received it in error, please delete it from your
>         system.
>         Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor
>         act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
>         Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
>         Further communication will signify your consent to this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 

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 Friday, 16 April 2010 19:01:28 UTC