- From: Lee Feigenbaum <feigenbl@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:49:56 -0500
- To: public-sweo-ig@w3.org
Kingsley Idehen wrote on 11/23/2006 12:28:56 PM: > > Posted on behalf of Orri Erling (while his posting perms are being sorted): > > The questionnaires as they now stand seem very technology centric. This is > of course understandable since they are about adoption of a technology. > These might however better engage the recipient if these were set in a more > application centric manner. A CIO or CTO or even a web developer may have > a rather vague idea of the semantic web, hence something to bring it in > focus can be useful. > > Thus, for the ones who say they do not have SW involvement, after all these > are the more important target, we could have a few additional questions. > > > For example, on the enterprise side: > > "If you are not using or considering semantic web technologies for EDI, 1. > do you have significant need for combining data from heterogeneous sources > in the first place? 2. What do you use for this, e.g. data warehouse > maintained by batch imports from different sources with customized ETL? > Applications directly accessing diverse RDBMS's? Do you see benefit in > introducing a semantic layer for homogenizing the terminology and structures > of disparate relational schemas, XML documents etc?" > > The last is a leading question. Maybe better ask "How do you see the > maintainability and agility of your present EDI?" Hi Kingsley and Orri, At the face-to-face, we discussed a variety of questions similar to these (though perhaps in a bit less detail). We decided in the end that in the interest of encouraging a high response rate to the questionnaires, it would probably be best to limit the initial questions to a small number of relatively simple questions. As we gather the responses, we will follow-up with some/all of the responders with more focused / detailed questions to help us build effective SW core and industry-specific messaging. I'd also be wary of including such specifics on the initial questionnaire as it pigeonholes the responders into thinking about only certain areas in which SW technologies are applicable, whereas there is value for our messaging in gaining an open-ended idea of what problems areas people currently associate with SW technologies. I think it would be a great idea to start taking these more specific questions and building a rough draft of potential questions for follow-up questionnaires on the wiki. Lee > On the web developer side: > > "Do you use tagging? In the applications you develop? In the applications > you use (Technorati, del.icio.us etc.) Do you find that it is easy to > combine data from different social networks, e.g. Myspace, LinkedIn? What > are the application scenarios you feel cannot be adequately addressed by > tagging plus full text search, if any? Do you encounter issues, either as a > user or developer, with information overload? Is there some needed > classification of incoming information that a combination of tags and spam > filtering does not do?" > > "What are the web sites/services/information feeds that you would most need > to integrate/merge/compare?" > > > Of course these questions implicitly contain our assumptions on what the > semantic web can offer. These cannot contain the full potential of the SW, > as this is so far undiscovered. Still, we wish to educate the public about > the better understood benefits and applications first, hence asking about > them is compatible with the mission. > > > Orri > > > > >
Received on Friday, 24 November 2006 05:50:09 UTC