W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2007

Re: [Linking-open-data] XULing or Grueling

From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:16:49 -0400
Message-ID: <47062B31.3010902@openlinksw.com>
To: Linking Open Data <linking-open-data@simile.mit.edu>
CC: SW-forum Web <semantic-web@w3.org>

T.Heath wrote:
> Hi Bijan, (CC Linking Open Data list),
> Nice. I think we could all use more prompts to stop and reflect. Some
> comments inline...
>> Now some of these may have had other factors as well (RSS 1.0 is an  
>> obvious example). But it's not clear to me that RSS 1.0 is such a  
>> great idea. If we could press a button and eliminate all the other  
>> flavors and Atom, or RDFize all of them, would we do so? Would it be  
>> a good idea?
> Yes. Speaking purely at a practical level I really appreciate being able
> to manipulate RSS data using a common set of RDF tools, and wish I could
> do this more often. Finding non-RSS1.0 feeds is always kind of annoying.
> I'm sure there's a stack of other reasons related to the innate
> linky-ness of RDF that sets it apart from other syndication formats.
>> The linked data stuff seems harmless in that afaict it doesn't hork  
>> anyone off and seems sorta neat (though I've personally not read a  
>> lot of excitement about it from outside our community; pointers are  
>> welcome).
> I'm guessing you didn't make it to the two Linked Data sessions at
> WWW2007 ;) Both the official Dev Track session and the informal BOF
> packed out the room, and there was a *lot* of excitement on both
> occasions; not just from the core Linked Data community, but from many
> (from inside and outside the SW world) who had heard Tim use the phrase
> in his keynote and came along to find out more. Paul Miller and Peter
> Murray-Rust captured some of this at [1-6]. The number of people who
> went away saying "ah, I get it [the Semantic Web] now" was both sobering
> and exciting.
>> Sorry to ramble: My question is whether we can or should come 
>> up with an analysis of these cases. Both the tactics of pushing 
>> adoption and the actual technological solutions.
> Yes, to all those points.
>> BTW, this isn't meant as a nay-saying bit, but as a wanting 
>> to derive useful lessons from past experience. The above links *do* 
>> contain nay-saying, but I'm less interested in refuting that than 
>> understanding what drove it and if there is any way to do better.
> Is there a secular equivalent of "amen"?!
> Cheers,
> Tom.
> [1]
> http://blogs.talis.com/nodalities/2007/05/linked_data_bof_www2007.php
> [2]
> http://blogs.talis.com/nodalities/2007/05/www2007_linked_data_once_again
> .php
> [3] http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=316
> [4] http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=315
> [5] http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=325
> [6] http://wwmm.ch.cam.ac.uk/blogs/murrayrust/?p=337
Tom et al,

I would also add the following Links re. commentary and appreciation of 
Linked Data outside the core Semantic Web community:

1. *http://www.mkbergman.com/?p=400*
2. **http://www.mkbergman.com/?p=405**
*Linked Data provides a very simple mechanism for explaining and 
demonstrating what the Semantic Data Web is all about :-)



Kingsley Idehen	      Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO 
OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Friday, 5 October 2007 12:17:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:03 UTC