Re: Should we adopt SKOS?

On 1/11/13 12:24 PM, Jon Phipps wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net 
> <mailto:kcoyle@kcoyle.net>> wrote:
>
>     With Mike and others I am concerned that the discussion is moving
>     away from semantic mark-up of visible text to a full metadata
>     standard including control of the value space. I think this adds a
>     complication that threatens the usability of schema.org
>     <http://schema.org> for its original purpose.
>
>
> +1
>
> Jon Phipps
>
+1 on the general sentiment.

I would like to qualify the sentiment (as I see it):

Schema.org has *effectively* focused on structured data_ representation 
via _basic entity->attribute->value oriented directed graphs, based on 
the well established entity relationship model [1]. The concern right 
now is that the discussion is veering this project towards the more 
fine-grained realm of entity relationship semantics, which ultimately 
leads to unproductive debates and exponentially growing inertia.

The Web needs structured data, as a top priority. Once in place, 
structured data provides the critical foundation for comprehension, 
appreciation, and exploitation of fine-grained entity relationship 
semantics.

We just need to walk, run, and then fly. Remember, Internet time != 
conventional time, so this is all going to happen very quickly -- modulo 
distractions :-)

Links:

1. http://bit.ly/YTdz3N -- Peter Chen's 1976 entity relationship model 
dissertation .

-- 

Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen