Re: call to arms

The effort of developing a semantic facebook for life scientist (called 
VIVO) is on the way and funded by NIH:

The preliminary versions have been running at the following sites:

VIVO Cornell
VIVO University of Florida
VIVO Indiana University
Southwest Biodiversity Knowledge Environment in China
Plant Evolutionary Biology Knowledge Environment in China
Biomedical and Health Knowledge Environment

More further development and improvement will be continuously released, 
please check:


Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> On 2010-03-30, Story Henry wrote:
>> For the moment, writing your foaf profile is nearly just a write only 
>> exercise. Some robots read it, but the result of doing so is not 
>> immediately obvious, if at all. Once one can see what the benefit is 
>> - and here I mean close to immediate feedback - such as getting 
>> access to a campus, being able to chat with friends, [...]
> So in essence what we need is a distributed version of Facebook: all 
> of the user specific metadata stored as RDF documents on the Web 
> and/or accessible via some well-defined protocol which can also do 
> targeted pushes and/or pulls of triples. (I wonder whether Google's 
> Wave stuff could help here; certainly some version of it could.) A UI 
> layer on top of that to make it usable and beautiful. Trust, which in 
> this case would probably be email authentication directly to your 
> hosting node, with optional PGP crypto. Perhaps also aggregation of 
> inter-host dataflows for efficiency.
> The main problem I see with this sort of thing is that you'd have to 
> pay for your subscription to one of the hosts (or host your own). 
> Financing from ads wouldn't be easy in this sort of environment, 
> because you could always roll your own open source implementation 
> which excluded any ad from other people's feeds. OTOH, any particular 
> host implementation could do whatever it wanted at the UI layer.
>> The outcome is pretty easy to describe: you are no longer locked into 
>> one provider.
> Yes, and that is part of the funding problem. I mean, I've repeatedly 
> asked Google to enable plain exports of data from their services. Even 
> they don't go there -- lock-in is evidently part of their business 
> model too.
>> If you want to help people grok linked data just having them play 
>> with data that is based on Linked Data won't help. After all: how 
>> would they distinguish that from normal data?
> One big way to make that distinction would be to build in location 
> independence from the start. That is, deep support for multiple 
> identifiers for the same data, means of propagating trust from one 
> identifier to the next, and eventually resolution services which 
> enable you to rename data to its newest URI. If this sort of thing 
> took off, even the giants like Google and Facebook would be inclined 
> to either implement their own resolution services or to subscribe to 
> an existing one.
>> Yes, the best way to do that is to start getting people to play with 
>> social networks. They are bound to be interested. As they improve the 
>> descriptions about themselves, they will then turn to dbpedia, 
>> musicbrains, and all the other linked data sites out there.
> Yes. In their most rudimentary forms, I think of such services as yet 
> another app/box on your (distributed) Facebook page. In the next phase 
> as integration of the basic data elements into the overall UI (i.e. 
> when I state I like kittens, every box that has to do with likes 
> actually links to some ontology and disambiguates the meaning using 
> standard UI components and data sources). And come nirvana, PnP/DnD ad 
> hoc functionality to build the boxes in the first place. ;)

Ying Ding, Assistant Professor of Information Science
School of Library & Information Science, Indiana University
1320 East 10th Street, Herman B Wells Library, LI025
Bloomington, IN 47405, USA

Tel: (812) 855 5388, Fax: (812) 855 6166 
Semantic Web Lab:

Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 00:38:51 UTC