Re: connections

In this thread, and the parallel ones, I see different problem spaces
its a complex issue that should be broken down

one is the query composition
another is the availability of data
and then the ease of use/utility of the tools
(probably more)

then there are some conflicts, for example on the one hand the w3c  produces
standards (rdf, owl) on the other hand
the tools and platforms that implement them, without necessarily  making
 the user tasks intuitive enough,

having had random conversations with platform developers it looks they want
to monetize on their work, and are not in a hurry
to achieve any results until their finances are secured

  perhaps the w3c could act more as 'the customer' , and promote the
adoption
of usability standard alongside technical ones (an argument that I
occasionally try to make)

from the query composition front, what about a tool that would facilitate
the generation of rdf data
when its not available?

assuming Danny eventually works out the optimal query, for example to
include specific data in relation to his side of
the valley, where humidity, wind, sun exposure, soil composition and other
local properties make up a microclimate
shouldnt there be a(any) place where this data could be entered so that the
query can be performed?

(I still think for some answers the web may still not be the best place, but
lets think hypotetically)

the nearest thing I have seen to the SW has been when I saw a demo of
semantic wiki ( Denny Vrandivich )
one could enter new data on the fly, and the table would update, I thought
that's cool, I could probably work with this
(I may to have to go through the examples a few times, but it looked doable
to me when I so the demo)

surely  query manipulation can be made foolproof, after all forms were
invented for that purpose if I remember,  (an interface that would allow
addin more fields to the query)

last i heard of semantic media wiki 'there were issues'

I would have thought thats a good place to start, anyone knows what happens
and if there are any test implementations or tutorials?
what can be so wrong with it>

Once  tasks are defined, the data is reliable and good enough, datasets can
be added on the fly as needed, and the tools are
straighforward and the tasks (say querying and manipulating queries) are
made more intuitive, then I am sure its all about setting up
good enough pilot studies from different fields of application with, for
each, enough people and community involvmene


since everybody is already more or less working on different aspect of the
above, I am sure that some magic
can be done simply with a bit more coordination of the different efforts


the cost/benefit issue is also complex,
depending what is calculated as cost and what as benefit, as there are
different classes of both,

IMHO to society at large,  and to the public pocket the last ten years of
publicly funded research have been a relatively quantifiable cost
(can work out  some ballpark figure by looking at the sw research
expenditure, but I am afraid to do it)
among the benefits have been lots of phds, salaries, some careers some new
knowledge and innovation,
but
some (including myself) argue
that visible  'public' benefits are not (yet)  adequate to the public costs,
which remain imho not fully justified

In my analysis this has turned out to be a  problem with our research
industry,(very generalised statement) where research expenditure
is often in a grey policy area, not clearly enough demarcated what public
benefits should derive from research, and another
can of worms altogether

to an average organisation that is confronted with the option to invest in
sw technologies today, it may just be too early , unquantifiable costs and
risks, but also limited business/revenue models etc

(how is giving my website users some sw functionality is going to provide my
customers with more value?)

I think I have heard of some benefits being reaped in the non public domain,
but because of that, we dont know for sure
what happens behind firewalls

Assuming some cohesion of purpose can be arranged, and  that research can
provide a wide enough range of more real world well defined
pilot schemes (where the cost/benefit analysis each pilot project is clear
upfront, and utility metrics adopted, for example)
with a sufficiently healthy stakeholder base not too easily alienated, I am
sure it would be possible to make at least some sense
of the word done so far

anything anywhere near the direction above can probably only be achieved  by
a community, which it looks is trying to pull itself
together here?

:-)


PDM

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 10:22 PM, adasal <adam.saltiel@gmail.com> wrote:

> Agriculture oriented data spaces (ontology and instance data)
>>
> How could that ever be automatic?
>
> Agriculture oriented data spaces (ontology and instance data)
>>
> Cannot anticipate every possible query, or even broad area of interest, in
> DBpedia.
> There must be an impulse to make a query of some sort. The issue is how
> complex that query must be.
> Isn't the implicit question why cannot some small query be enough to draw
> out the information I want?
> Here the query terms should be enough to form a coherent query. In this
> example they should translate into a sparql query. But that is not enough,
> because DBPedia needs a schema and some instance data too. erm.
> Or perhaps it could be semi-automatic?
> Imagine that there is a repository with sample kinds of data in it. I think
> this would be easy to use.
> I want to build up a query about tomato seeds, planting, region, time of
> year. So some general data is classified along those lines. That would be
> combined into a schema. Maybe some of it would be a subset of other schemas,
> so in my making the choice further useful suggestions could be made. I would
> then be asked to refine the parameters of the query by actual region, etc.
> I am assuming that interested parties would make available basic meta data
> sets with human understandable sample data.
>
> Am I making any sort of sensible suggestion here? Is this different to what
> already exists as available triples? I am unsure. There is something
> circular here.
>
> Even so we are still left with that data that has not been classified
> because there is no interested party to do so, or because the type of
> classification is new, complex or transient.
>
> Adam
>
> On 18 April 2010 21:56, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Kingsley
>>
>> still not automatic though, is it?
>>
>> On 18 April 2010 22:38, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com> wrote:
>> > Danny Ayers wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Kingsley, how do I find out when to plant tomatos here?
>> >>
>> >
>> > And you find the answer to that in Wikipedia via
>> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomato>? Of course not.
>> >
>> > Re. DBpedia, if you have a Agriculture oriented data spaces (ontology
>> and
>> > instance data) that references DBpedia (via linkbase) then you will have
>> a
>> > better chance of an answer since we would have temporal properties and
>> > associated values in the Linked Data Space (one that we can mesh with
>> > DBpedia even via SPARQL).
>> >
>> > Kingsley
>> >>
>> >> On 17 April 2010 19:36, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Danny Ayers wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 16 April 2010 19:29, greg masley <roxymuzick@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> What I want to know is does anybody have a method yet to
>> successfully
>> >>>>> extract data from Wikipedia using dbpedia? If so please email the
>> >>>>> procedure
>> >>>>> to greg@masleyassociates.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That is an easy one, the URIs are similar - you can get the pointer
>> >>>> from db and get into wikipedia. Then you do your stuff.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I'll let Kingsley explain.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Greg,
>> >>>
>> >>> Please add some clarity to your quest.
>> >>>
>> >>> DBpedia the project is comprised of:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. Extractors for converting Wikipedia content into Structured Data
>> >>> represented in a variety of RDF based data representation formats
>> >>> 2. Live instance with the extracts from #1 loaded into a DBMS that
>> >>> exposes a
>> >>> SPARQL endpoint (which lets you query over the wire using SPARQL query
>> >>> language).
>> >>>
>> >>> There is a little more, but I need additional clarification from you.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>>
>> >>> Kingsley Idehen       President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web:
>> >>> http://www.openlinksw.com
>> >>> Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>> >>> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Kingsley Idehen       President & CEO OpenLink Software     Web:
>> > http://www.openlinksw.com
>> > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen<http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
>> > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://danny.ayers.name
>>
>>
>


-- 
Paola Di Maio
**************************************************
“Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.”
Albert Einstein
**************************************************