Hi Martin, > The fact that there is obviously a lot of low quality data on the > current Web should not encourage us to publish masses of low-quality > data and then celebrate ourselves for having achieved a lot. The > current Web tolerates buggy markup, broken links, and questionable > content of all types. But I hope everybody agrees that the Web is > successful because of this tolerance, not because of the buggy content > itself. Quite to the contrary, the Web has been broadly adopted > because of the lots of commonly agreed high-quality contents. Sure, where is the problem? The same holds for the Web of Data: There is a lot of high quality content and a lot of low quality content. Which means - as on the classic Web - that the data consumer need to decide which content it wants to use. If the Web has proved anything than that having a completely open architecture is a crucial factor for being able to succeed on global scale. The Web of Linked Data also aims at global scale. Thus, I will keep on betting on open solutions without curation or any other bottle neck. > If you continue to live the linked data landfill style it will fall > back on you, reputation-wise, funding-wise, and career-wise. Some > rules hold in ecosystems of all kinds and sizes. Sorry, you are leaving the grounds of scientific discussion here and I will thus not comment. Best, Chris > Best > > MartinReceived on Friday, 22 October 2010 14:47:07 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:20 UTC