Re: The Great Public Linked Data Use Case Register for Non-Technical End User Applications

On 25 June 2013 01:00, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> On 24 June 2013 14:31, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
> > On 6/24/13 2:14 AM, Michael Brunnbauer wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Kingsley Idehen,
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 05:32:00PM -0400, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> >>>
> >>> We don't need a central repository of anything. Linked Data is supposed
> >>> to be about enhancing serendipitous discovery of relevant things.
>
> You appear to be arguing against the simple useful practice of
> communally collecting information. Just because we can scatter
> information around the Web and subsequently aggregate it, doesn't mean
> that such fragmentation is always productive.  I don't see anyone
> arguing that the only option is to monolithically centralise
> everything forever; just that a communal effort on cataloguing things
> might be worth the time.
>

Im unsure the argument is that central data stores are wrong.

However, Tim often says value-add of the web is unexpected reuse.  It's the
portability of linked data that helps to achieve this (one way to make data
portable is to use global names, ie URIs), so data gets used in interesting
ways (and interesting places) that may not have been originally anticipated.


>
>
>
>
> > Google already demonstrates some of this, in the most obvious sense via
> its
> > search engine, and no so obvious via its crawling of Linked Data which
> then
> > makes its way Google Knowledge Graph and G+ etc..
>
> -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation_needed
>
> You've sometimes said that all Web pages are already "Linked Data"
> with boring link-types. Are you talking about something more RDFish in
> this case?
>
> Dan
>
>