- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:08:31 +0100
- To: "Paul Walsh, Segala" <paulwalsh@segala.com>
- Cc: public-sweo-ig@w3.org
On 15/02/07, Paul Walsh, Segala <paulwalsh@segala.com> wrote: > > I know this has come up before but I'll ask the question again. > > What is the W3C's position of the interpretation of the Semantic Web on > wikipedia [1]. > > What is the rest of the group's thoughts about it? I was pleasantly surprised by the entry, most of it seems reasonably accurate - very good to see the timbl quotes. > It's funny that everyone [2] knows that the SM is a W3C ambition, yet they > decide to link to the ever so reliable wiki. Hmm, that might suggest the W3C's intro pages need work. > I could be cheeky and ensure it's update to include Content Labels. Or, is > that cheeky?! I think it's entirely justified - there's a rather ill-informed section on "Censorship, and privacy" which could do with a counter-view, and Content Labels could add a good positive note. I just added a paragraph to a section entitled "Doubling output formats" - the information wasn't up-to-date as the specific issue is addressed by GRDDL. Personally I wouldn't delete any criticism of the Semantic Web I found there, that could (reasonably) be interpreted as not having a Neutral Point of View [3]. But aside from that, I'd suggest anything that improves the quality of the information is a Good Thing and to be encouraged: relevant additions, editorial changes to make it more readable etc. It is a Wiki after all - a community resource. If anyone has a minute, the Layer Cake they've got is a little stale... Cheers, Danny. > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_Web > [2] http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=4499 not everyone - just an example which > may have been passed around already. [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Npov -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2007 19:08:38 UTC