Re: Enterprise information system

On 2/27/15 4:19 PM, Paul Tyson wrote:
> I don't know that many "linked data" systems improve much on
> conventional ones.

To that answer, I ask: what is the problem?

As I see it, the problem boils down to data access, integration, and 
dissemination. This has to happen on time, in the right form, and 
delivered to the relevant entity.

All the "conventional systems" I am aware of suffer from a common flaw, 
one  that I refer to as data-silo-fication. This problem ranges from big 
iron to tiny computing devices.

What are the ramifications of the data-silo-fication? Degradation of the 
following:

1. Agility
2. Privacy
3. Society.

> We have enough of data and linking.
How come? The world is full of data silos that hide behind silky 
promises of convenience and/or outright cognitive dissonance.

>   What we need to
> link are the artifacts of mental processes, which are not so easily
> reduced to "data".

Yes! And you already achieve that in the so-called "real world" using 
natural language sentences, one of mankind's most powerful inventions [1].

We have used language to encode and decode information for eons.

> That is the real promise of these technologies, but
> is not, so far as I am aware, being pursued anywhere in public.

Well, we have this wonderful thing called the World Wide Web. Its basic 
architecture boils down to:

1. Using HTTP URIs as names for entity types (or classes) -- the 
*nature* of entity relationship participants
2. Using HTTP URIs as names for predicates (sentence forming relations) 
-- the *nature* of entity relationship types (functional, 
inverse-functional, transitive, symmetrical etc..)
3. Using HTTP URIs as names for instances of entity types -- actual 
entity relationship participants.

In addition to the above, albeit not immediately obvious in HTML (which 
has had <link/> and the <a/> control  in place forever) , the 
aforementioned architecture also included the ability to construct 
sentences where the subject, predicate, and object (optionally) are 
identified by HTTP URIs.

The digital sentences described above can be written to documents using 
a variety of notations (HTML, XML, CSV, TURTLE, JSON, JSON-LD etc..), 
and served from any location on an HTTP network, with name 
interpretation (description lookup or de-reference) baked in.

The semantics of the predicates that hold these sentences together are 
both machine and human comprehensible. Thus, anyone can lookup the 
*nature* of an entity relationship type en route to understanding the 
meaning of a given entity relationship.  What more do you need?

In my experience  I see a big problem that boils down to understanding 
that "over automation" is bad. Recent fixation with imperative 
programming and applications, in every situation, is utterly broken.

The assumption that end-users are dumb, stupid, even lazy is the eternal 
blind spot that afflicts those that simply cannot see, or even describe 
a digital computing realm without fixating on a specific programming 
language, framework, library, data serialization format, or some new 
dogma (e.g., Open Source -- which doesn't guarantee data 
de-silo-fication ).

In my eyes, what we need is the ability to put language to use, in the 
medium that the Web provides. That simply boils down to systematic use 
of signs [HTTP URIs], syntax [S,P,O or E,A,V term arrangement rules], 
and semantics [meaning of subject, predicate, and object relationship 
roles] for encoding and decoding information [data in some context]. 
Basically,  an ability to write the aforementioned digital sentences to 
HTTP network accessible documents, using a variety notations.

BTW -- if you know of some existing alternative to what I've described, 
that doesn't include a hidden data-silo-fication tax, I am all ears :)

>
> Note, however, the recent release of Linked Data Platform as a W3C
> standard (http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/REC-ldp-20150226/). No doubt this
> will be useful in its own right, but also point the way to future
> opportunities by what it*doesn't*  cover.

LDP simply addresses read-write issues for those that can't make use of 
SPARQL 1.1 Update, SPARQL Graph Protocol, or WebDAV (which is XML 
specific in regards to metadata).

Links:

[1] http://www.slideshare.net/kidehen/understanding-29894555/55 -- 
Natural Language & Data
[2] https://www.pinterest.com/pin/389561436488854582/ -- What sites 
between you and your data
[3] http://kidehen.blogspot.com/2014/07/nanotation.html -- Nanotation 
(inserting digital sentences wherever plain text is allowed)
[4] 
http://kidehen.blogspot.com/2014/08/linked-local-data-lld-and-linked-open.html 
-- Linked Local Data vs Linked Open Data .

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this