RE: a concern on SW technologies: document content

-----Original Message-----
From: public-sweo-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sweo-ig-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen

[Lee Feigenbaum wrote] 

[...] For instance, Virtuoso [1], Oracle, DB2, MS SQL Server, and a
Kingsley, perhaps I'm just grouchy after a long week at work, but I don't
feel this is the proper forum to advertise your company's products. At the
least, you could surely include similar footnotes for Oracle, DB2, and
SQL[PW]  Server! :-)

[Kingsley's response]

I think you're kinda being grouchy here :-)

This forum is about knowledge exchange (I hope).  If I knew that Oracle, 
DB2, MS SQL Server had RDF, XML, SQL and SPARQL access available I would
splatter my response with such links. I am not one for deliberate 
omission, I simply don't play that game.  If you or anyone else one the 
list knows where those missing links are why not simply add them (now or
whenever that are available)?  I don't think this is a forum where 
knowledge is contributed on the basis of "all or nothing".


[PW] Personally I think everyone is within their right to publish to the
group, anything they feel is appropriate, especially if they have a
commercially viable implementation that can help demonstrate the benefits of
the Semantic Web *today*. 

If there are omissions (and there will be lots, especially when I contribute
personally :-)) then someone else fills the blanks - that's the point of
having wikis; you just throw content up for other to edit.

Having a real commercial drive is what makes the MWI and WCL-XG so
successful in *delivery* IMHO. By that I mean, they've both published
documents/specifications quicker than any other initiative within the W3C! 

Kind regards,
Paul

Received on Saturday, 9 December 2006 10:14:47 UTC