Re: Changes to "Benefits" section

Quoting Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>:

> In follow-up to a Skype call yesterday in which we discussed  
> comments received,
> I have edited the Benefits page as follows (see diff [1]):
>
> -- Added sentence at the end of the Scope section:
>
>     Note that Linked Data technology per se does not require data to  
> be "open"
>     -- i.e., publicly available under a license that permits free  
> use -- though

Are you meaning "free as beer" here? Or free as in "unconstrained"?

>     the potential of the technology is best realized when data is  
> published as
>     Linked Open Data (LOD)."
>
>    Is everyone in agreement with this somewhat simplified characterization of
>    "open" data?
>
> -- Added sentence proposed by the "Issues and Recommendations" group:
>
>     History shows that all technologies are transitory, and the history of
>     information technology suggests that specific data formats are especially
>     short-lived.  By making a clean distinction between the meaning of data
>     ("semantics") and specific data structures ("syntax" or  
> "formats"), Linked
>     Data will lead to the creation of better, more durable descriptive
>     standards.

Is it "a clean distinction?" or is it a matter of favoring semantics  
over syntax? I'm not sure what the result is of the distinction.

It's a damned hard concept to define in just a few sentences!

kc

>
> -- Renamed section "Benefits to Developers and Vendors" and added:
>
>     Library vendors that support Linked Data will be able to market their
>     products outside of the library world, while vendors outside the library
>     world may be able to adapt their more generic products to the specific
>     requirements of libraries.
>
> Tom
>
> [1]  
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Benefits&diff=5697&oldid=5689
>
>



-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Received on Thursday, 11 August 2011 00:35:52 UTC