- From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 21:01:55 -0700
- To: "janowicz@ucsb.edu" <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-lod <public-lod@w3.org>
HI Krzysztof, > this is all about finding the right balance Definitely—but I have the feeling the balance is currently tipped very much to one side (and perhaps not the side that delivers the most urgent components for the SemWeb). > as we also do not want to have tons of 'ideas' > papers without any substantial content or proof of concept Mere ideas would indeed not be sufficient; but even papers with substantial content and/or a proof of concept will have a difficult time getting accepted if there is no evaluation that satisfies the reviewers. (And, lacking a framework to evaluate evaluations, I see people typically choosing for things they know, hence why incremental research gets accepted easily.) Best, Ruben
Received on Friday, 8 July 2016 04:02:34 UTC