- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:26:44 -0400
- To: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>, Georgi Kobilarov <georgi.kobilarov@gmx.de>
Georgi Kobilarov wrote: > Hello, > > >>>> Now here is the obvious question, re. broader realm of faceted data >>>> navigation, have you guys digested the underlying concepts >>>> demonstrated by Microsoft Pivot? >>>> >>>> >>> I've seen the TED talk on Pivot. It's a very well polished >>> implementation of faceted browsing. The Seadragon technology >>> integration and animations are well executed. As far as "underlying >>> concepts" in faceted browsing go, I haven't noticed anything novel >>> > there. > > I agree with David here, nothing novel about the underlying concept. > One thing I found quite nice and haven't seen before is grouping results > along one facet dimension (the bar-graph representation of results). I > think > that is a neat idea. > The integration of Seadragon and deep-zooming looks nice, but little more > than that. Not all objects render into nice pictures, and the > interaction of zooming in > and out isn't a helpful one in my opinion. The zooming gives the > impression > at first that the position of objects in that 2D space is meaningful, > but it > is not. It's an eye-catcher, not more. > > > >>> One thing to note: in each Pivot demo example, there is data of >>> exactly one type only--say, type people. So it seems, using Microsoft >>> Pivot, you can't pivot from one type to another, say, from people to >>> their companies. You can't do that example I used for Parallax: US >>> presidents -> children -> schools. Or skyscrapers -> architects -> >>> other buildings. So from what I've seen, as it currently is, Microsoft >>> Pivot cannot be used for browsing graphs because it cannot pivot (over >>> graph links). >>> >> Yes, this is a limitation re. general faceted browsing concepts. >> > > No, it's a limitation of the current implementations of faceted browsing. > Not a general problem with faceted browsing. > > > >> The most interesting part to me is the use of an alternative symbol >> mechanism for the human interaction aspect i.e., deep zoom images where >> you would typically see a long human unfriendly URI. >> > > "Where you would typically see URIs"? Really? **clean up post re. some critical typos ** Where would you see URIs? What do you see when you use: http://lod.openlinksw.com ? And when you don't see URIs (human or machine, the typical case re. Faceted Browsing over RDF) what do you have re. HTTP based Linked Data? Zilch! > > >>> Furthermore, I believe that to get Pivot to perform well, you need a >>> cleaned up, *homogeneous* data set, presumably of small size (see >>> their Wikipedia example in which they picked only the top 500 most >>> visited articles). SW/linked data in their natural habitat, however, >>> is rarely that cleaned up and homogeneous ... > > Is that really a problem of Linked Data Web as such? I don't think so. > There is a lot of badly structured, not well cleaned up data on the > current > Linked Data Web. Because there was so much excitement about publishing > anything in the early day, and so little attention to the actual data > that's > getting published. That is going to change. > >>> So by the time you can >>> use Pivot on SW/linked data, you will already have solved all the >>> interesting and challenging problems. >>> >> This part is what I call an innovation slot since we have hooked it into >> > our > >> DBMS hosted faceted engine and successfully used it over very large data >> sets. > > Kingsley, I'm wondering: How did you do that? I tried it myself, and it > doesn't work. Did I indicate that my demo instance was public? How did you come to overlook that? > Pivot can't make use of server-side faceted browsing engines. > Why do you speculate? You are incorrect and Virtuoso *doing* what you claim is impossible will be emphatic proof, nice and simple. Pivot consumes data from HTTP accessible collections (which may be static or dynamic [1]). A dynamic collection is comprised of CXML resources (basically XML) . > You need to send *all* the data to the Pivot client, and it computes the > facets and performs any filtering operation client-side. You make a collection from a huge corpus of data (what I demonstrate) then you "Save As" (which I demonstrate as the generation point re. CXML resource) and then Pivot consumes. All the data is Virtuoso hosted. There are two things you are overlooking: 1. The dynamic collection is produced at the conclusion of Virtuoso based faceted navigation (the interactions basically describes the Facet membership to Virtuoso) 2. Pivot works with static and dynamic collections . *I specifically state, this is about using both products together to solve a major problem. #1 Faceted Browsing UX #2 Faceting over a huge data corpus.* Virtuoso is an HTTP server, it can serve a myriad of representations of data to user agents (it has its own DBMS hosted XSLT Processor and XML Schema Validator with XQuery/XPath to boot, all very old stuff). BTW -- how do you think Peter Haase got his variant working? I am sure he will shed identical light on the matter for you. Links: 1. http://www.getpivot.com/developer-info/ --- Please note Unbounded Dynamic Collections 2. http://www.getpivot.com/developer-info/hosting.aspx#Dynamic -- Look at the diagram then revist the architecture of Virtuoso (its a Hybrid Data Server that offers a plethora of functions in a single product, that's how it was architected from day 1) > Works well for up > to around 1k objects, but that's it. Pivot's architecture is in that > sense > very much like Exhibit in Silverlight. > > > Best, > Georgi > > -- > Georgi Kobilarov > Uberblic Labs Berlin > http://blog.georgikobilarov.com > > > -- 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 Monday, 29 March 2010 18:27:12 UTC