- From: David R. Karger <karger@theory.lcs.mit.edu>
- Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 14:03:50 -0400
- To: Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com
- CC: www-rdf-dspace@w3.org
Many things to discuss in Mark's email, but right now I just want to tackle the highest-level one. As observed, the proposal is to manually revise our data to fit some more "standard" schemas. We could instead choose to use semantic web technology to give a declaration of how the idiosyncratic schema map to "standard" schema, and rely on sweb tools to perform the mapping. This more ambitious approach would certainly exercise the ideas of the semantic web. And we do want to exercise those ideas. However, I see value in taking the "easy way out" with respect to the dspace repository, because it lets us factor our research agenda into two separately challenging parts. We all recognize the challenge of interoprating a number of distinct rdf repositories with their own schema, but I think that we haven't yet solved the problem of managing a single rdf repository with a uniform schema! I think there would be value in creating a core of the dspace repository that doesn't need to worry about semantic web issues. d From: "Butler, Mark" <Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com> Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 17:22:23 +0100 X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Archived-At: http://www.w3.org/mid/5E13A1874524D411A876006008CD059F066A1C70@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com X-Mailing-List: <www-rdf-dspace@w3.org> archive/latest/203 X-Loop: www-rdf-dspace@w3.org X-SBClass: Nonlocal Origin [192.6.10.2] X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.7 required=5.0 tests=SUBJ_HAS_SPACES version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: ** X-SpamBouncer: 1.5 (2/23/03) X-SBPass: NoBounce X-SBClass: OK X-Folder: Bulk These comments are much more general than the other comments, so apologies for this in advance. I'm sure some of the following points are controversial but hopefully they will create further discussion. One of the promises of the semantic web is that "if person A writes his data in one way, and person B writes her data in another way, as long as they have both used semantic web tools, then we can leverage those tools to merge data from A and data from B declaratively i.e. without having to rewrite the software used by A or by B, and without necessitating them to change their individual data sets". Before the semantic web, we could have used data A with data B, but it would have necessitated some changes to the data and software of one or both of the parties. However in this proposal, it seems that rather than exploring the first path i.e."we have a load of data in the history system format. This was similiar to Harmony and Dublin Core, but since then those technologies have moved on. Let's see if we can map between these different data formats by using schema and ontology languages without changing any code" it seems like we are taking the second by default i.e. "we have a load of data in the history system format but its incompatible with the latest versions of ABC and Dublin Core. Let's rewrite the software that generates it so its complies with their latest specifications". Now the problem with adopting this second approach is we aren't really demonstrating the utility of the semantic web. Now the history system may be sufficiently broken that it's just not possible to use the first approach. Alternatively the SW tools available may not yet be sufficiently advanced to support the first approach. However ideally I think we ought to at least explore the alternatives that try to follow approach one, assuming this is possible with time constraints. So ideally I would like to see the descriptive note discuss more alternative solutions and then evaluate those solutions. At the moment it just describes a single solution. The outcome of the document may still be the same, i.e. the approach we use to solving the problem, but I think there is a bit more thinking or how we arrived at this point could be made explicit. Dr Mark H. Butler Research Scientist HP Labs Bristol mark-h_butler@hp.com Internet: http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/
Received on Thursday, 8 May 2003 14:00:18 UTC