Re: scientific publishing process (was Re: Cost and access)

On 10/3/14 5:05 PM, Paul Tyson wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 10:32 -0700, Alexander Garcia Castro wrote:
>> >from reading all these emails it seems to me that we are somehow
>> >thinking just in terms of the same document just that more friendly
>> >for a web browser. I would argue that having a layout friendly
>> >document has been solved long ago, the problem is having an
>> >interoperable document beyond just having the usual metadata (author,
>> >tittle, etc).
>> >  
> Yes. We are setting the bar too low. The field of knowledge computing
> will only reach maturity when authors can publish their theses in such a
> manner that one can programmatically extract the concepts, propositions,
> and arguments; merge and reconcile them with one's own collection of
> concepts, propositions, and arguments; and manipulate (test, compare,
> confirm, etc.) them to alter or enlarge one's knowledge.

Yes, and we have a name for an abstract language (loosely bound to a 
variety of notations) that enables the above, in a manner that's 
comprehensible by both humans and machines, its called RDF.

When you construct RDF statements (claims or propositions) using HTTP 
URIs to denote the subject, predicate, and objects of said propositions, 
you end up with RDF based Linked Data i.e., webby (or web-like) 
propositions that are still comprehensible to both humans and machines  :-)

Links:

[1] http://kidehen.blogspot.com/2014/07/nanotation.html -- About Nanotation

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen 
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this