Re: Introducing Semgel, a semantic database app for gathering & analyzing data from websites

On 7/20/12 4:06 AM, Sebastian Schaffert wrote:
> Am 19.07.2012 um 20:50 schrieb Kingsley Idehen:
>
>>> I completely understand and appreciate your desire (which I share) to see a mature landscape with a range of linked data sources. I can also understand how a database or spreadsheet can potentially offer fine-grained data access - your examples do illustrate the point very well indeed!
>>>
>>> However, if we want to build a sustainable business, the decision to build these features needs to be demand driven.
>> I disagree.
>> Note, I responded because I assumed this was a new Linked Data service. But it clearly isn't. Thus, I don't want to open up a debate about Linked Data virtues if you incorrectly assume they should be *demand driven*.
>>
>> Remember, this is the Linked Open Data (LOD) forum. We've long past the issue of *demand driven* over here, re. Linked Data.
> But I agree. A technology that is not able to fire proof its usefulness in a demand driven / problem driven environment is maybe interesting from an academic standpoint but otherwise not really useful.

So are you claiming that Linked Data hasn't fire proofed its usefulness 
in a demand drive / problem driven environment?

> And if you look at the recent troubles with Semantic Web business models you see the consequences.

Please clarify what you mean as that statement is quite unclear. What 
"recent troubles" are you speaking  (so definitively) about re., the 
business model scalability and viability of Linked Data and/or the 
broader Semantic Web vision?

>
> You are not the only one in "the community", so please don't say "we've passed the issue".

Of course I am not the only one in the community. But, I think you are 
missing a critical point: this forum/list/community is about Linked 
Data. Thus, I would expect product announcements to be related to Linked 
Data, at the very least. What's really confusing to me, right now, is 
the fact that I simply sought an actual Linked Data connection from 
Hatish (assuming there had to be one somewhere), received push-back 
about "demand" and a string of replies that are responding something 
else inferred from my response .


> I'd say we have not even really started with the issue, we've just pushed some technology out there, not knowing yet whether it is really useful.

I disagree, and here are some very basic examples of proof that the 
utility (usefulness) and demand (need) for Linked Data are yesterday's 
topic:

1. Facebook -- every data object in this data space has a Linked Data 
URI, and by that I mean all 850 million+ profile alongside other data 
objects that represent other aspects of Faceook profiles

2. Various Govts. worldwide -- lead by US and UK govt efforts enhancing 
Open Data by adhering the principles espoused in TimBL's Linked Data meme

3. Rest of the LOD cloud which now tops 55+ billion triples and growing 
every second.


>   On the other hand Harish is giving us one example of where at least part of the technology *might* be useful and I appreciate this very much. In general, I also prefer acting over talking. ;-)

Useful, of course. But useful in a manner that has relevance to Linked 
Data is what I sought from my questions. There is no Linked Data in that 
solution, and all wanted to do was foster dialog that would encourage 
production of Linked Data as others have already done -- for years -- 
re. data from Crunchbase.

My response included examples of what's been achieved with Cruncbase 
data for a very long time, so I hoped he would see the virtues in doing 
something similar such that in classic Linked Data fashion you end up 
with a richer Web of Linked Data.


>
> Considering comments like yours, I really fear for the community to loose its openness and acceptance of differing opinions.

What is the differing opinion?

>   I had already given up really following the discussions here for exactly that reason (and I am not the only one), but this message appeared on my phone before the mail client could sort it away and simply made me upset.

Sorry for upsetting you, and I hope you become less upset when you 
understand my point. A simple route to that destination starts by you 
responding to my questions.

I strongly believe you've misunderstood my response, as measured as it 
was, initially. Thus, let's reconcile all of this, and I am quite 
confident that my fundamental point will be resurrected and then clearly 
understood.

>
> Greetings,
>
> Sebastian


-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen