RE: Size estimates of current LS space (and Introductions)

Wikipedia has clearly been working in the general sciences, though of
course it has its limitations.  (For example, one probably would not use
a wikipedia URL as a concept identifier in a Semantic Web application,
because the definition of a term can change as fast as a user can type
in a browser.)  It will be interesting to see how quickly its gravity
pulls in life sciences terms.

David Booth, Ph.D.
HP Software
dbooth@hp.com
Phone: +1 617 629 8881
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-semweb-lifesci-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Nigam Shah
> Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 5:06 PM
> To: 'June Kinoshita'; 'Joanne Luciano'
> Cc: 'Jeremy Zucker'; 'Skinner, Karen ((NIH/NIDA)) [E]'; 'Eric 
> Neumann'; 'public-semweb-lifesci hcls'
> Subject: RE: Size estimates of current LS space (and Introductions)
> 
> 
> Hi June,
> 
> Thanks for the detailed response. One follow up comment (not for you)
> below:
> 
> > Could the scientific community perform this
> > vetting and editing function itself, a la wikipedia? We have
> > found that in general, this does not work. Many scientists
> > refuse to correct or criticize colleagues directly in a public
> forum.
> 
> Could there be a mechanism in place that such contributions (taking
> the time to politely edit, correct/modify content) would have some
> brownie points with the establishment. I mean right now, what does a
> person get for "selflessly" editing content?
> 
> May be its time citations mechanisms start factoring in "blogosphere
> activity" ... Just a thought.
> 
> Regards,
> Nigam.
> 
> 
>

Received on Friday, 11 August 2006 20:46:44 UTC