- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:56:45 -0400
- To: Tom Heath <tom.heath@talis.com>
- CC: "KangHao Lu (Kenny)" <kennyluck@csail.mit.edu>, public-lod@w3.org
Tom Heath wrote: > Kingsley, > > My recollection of events is as follows: > > 1. A number of us (you, me, others - don't remember exactly who) > agreed that the community.linkeddata.org site was a good idea. > Yes. > 2. You set up an ODS instance running in EC2 and asked me to setup the > appropriate CNAME record in the DNS. > Yes. > 3. I set up the CNAME record as requested. > Yes. > 4. A group of people, that did not include me, offered to take on the > task of overseeing the community.linkeddata.org site. > Yes. > 5. The *group* decided to stop using the ODS instance at > community.linkeddata.org and move the content to the main > linkeddata.org site. > Lost me. > 6. At some point afterwards the original EC2 instance was > decommissioned. As far as I know a backup is not available. > Of course a backup is available, its online right now as per my post (posts are out of sync time wise). > So that others have access to the off-list discussions on this topic > I've put a number of relevant emails online at: > http://tomheath.com/blog/2010/03/the-demise-of-community-linkeddata-org/ > This is with Michael's consent. I assume that given your "private > conversation with you (while assuming it was public)" comment then you > are happy for this correspondence to be public, and that you can say > the same on Ted's behalf. > > For the record I don't think we can afford to ignore the UI. > The UI is a none issue since we are dealing with machine readable identifiers re. WebIDs. If there is one thing Linked Data and HTTP are supposed to be about its the separation of: 1. Datum 2. Data Storage 3. Data Representation 4. Data Access Protocol 5. Data Presentation ODS isn't a monolithic application, in actual fact its a virtualization engine. As for UI, go generate a WebID using ODS and compare it to anything else that exists. All you do is Click, Click, Click and your done (assuming you have a name and email address in your profile). Also, even with rudimentary facts like name and email address, when you de-reference your WebID you will be quite surprised what it will mesh in should you visit URIBurner (or if I enable the Sponger locally). Kingsley > I'll reply to Kenny's proposals/questions after the weekend. > > Tom. > > > On 26 March 2010 17:41, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: > >> Tom Heath wrote: >> >>> On 26 March 2010 15:27, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hmm, there once was an instance of Virtuoso+ODS at: >>>> <http://community.linkeddata.org/ods> that actually gave all members of >>>> LOD a URI. All you have to do is walk through the LOD mail archives to >>>> see how it came to an end. Tom Heath didn't want it there, and as far as >>>> I was concerned, I simply wasn't interested in grappling with him; its >>>> his domain (bottom line) and he has the right to do whatever with it (my >>>> last comments in an old mail thread about this matter). >>>> >>>> >>> Kingsley, >>> >>> I don't believe your mail gives an accurate account of events. >>> >> It does. >> >>> From my >>> records the discussion was mainly off-list, and the decision to >>> deprecate community.linkeddata.org was a group decision, not mine >>> alone. At some point after that decision was taken, the Openlink Data >>> Spaces instance that you hosted at that subdomain disappeared. >>> >>> >> I took it off line since it was Amazon EC2 hosted. Wouldn't you if you were >> in my shoes after what happened? >> >>> (For the record I never hosted anything at this subdomain, it was >>> simply pointed using a DNS CNAME record at an EC2 instance >>> administered by Openlink.) >>> >>> It would be useful if you could properly reference the mails in >>> question so others can refer to them easily. I've assembled those >>> messages I've found which are relevant to the topic and will put these >>> online shortly so others have access. >>> >>> >> In my response to you, I specifically said: >> You own the domain, so you can do whatever with it. >> >> If I was having a private conversation with you (while assuming it was >> public), I can easily go dig up my archives. >> >> You (and the group that excluded me) decided to take down something that you >> seem to partially understand, clearly. I told you repeatedly that it was >> about URIs for community members first, forget about the UI etc.. >> >> It was there for dog-fooding purposes, and I am sure you can google up on >> that re. how it was introduced and offered. >> >> >>> Tom. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> Kingsley Idehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: >> http://www.openlinksw.com >> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen >> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- 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, 26 March 2010 19:57:15 UTC