Re: The O'Reilly Filter?

Hi Erics,

Paranoia, dude!

Anectdote:
I've been reading Jon Udell's blog [1] for a long while, he's
positioned himself in a similar analyst place as yon O'Reilly
gentleman. About every two months for the last year or so I've felt
compelled to notify him that the particular thing he's pointing out as
problematic and/or cool has already been done using SemWeb tech
(usually ages ago). I think he quoted me in reference to microformats,
but he has consistently kept well clear of mentioning RDF.

But he just interviewed the CEO of a company that recently added RDF
with SPARQL to their SQL/ODBMS/best kept secret/WS/...database
system's reportoire. My oh my Udell mentions the stuff. Taboo broken.

Anyhow, as far as I'm aware, O'Reilly were the first people to publish
a book with RDF in the title (although I have been planting the stuff
in Wrox pulp for years ;-) but I don't think it leapt of their
shelves. Ruby on Rails did. But RoR is generally good for the web,
which is a good thing, right? Oh yeah, and folksy tags and solid
semantics are entirely compatible [2].

When RDF actually starts visibly solving the data integration problems
on the web (or a few months thereafter), the likes of O'Reilly will
start to take notice. Right now the benefits of filesystem
optimisation are in focus, like they've got a backlog of Unix books to
shift.

I reckon there's less to worry about from anti-semweb bias in the
press than reluctance to slap good data & systems on the web. Where is
the visible bio stuff? Admittedly I don't know an enzyme from an
e-coli, but I would expect that in this day age age the network would
know.

Cheers,
Danny.


[1] http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2006/04/28.html#a1437
[2] http://www.holygoat.co.uk/projects/tags/


--

http://dannyayers.com

Received on Sunday, 30 April 2006 00:49:22 UTC