speaking of which (open data xchange standards/ontologies, tasty URIs for programmes, et al), I find this relevant and suggest the group has a read:
http://sites.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/suhl/bizer/pub/LinkedDataTutorial/#hown ame best-- --cs -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren Stephens Sent: 17 July 2007 16:12 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [backstage] Links to video/audio for specific shows > Now, I might have this wrong - but you're suggesting that there should > be a standard way of... describing data.... > suggested by the BBC, so that all systems structure their data in the > same way? Not quite. There should be one or more standards for appropriate applications suggested by a wider community (broadcasters - of which the BBC is but one) so that all systems structure their data in a way that is able to be widely understood. For example, agreeing a common ontology for programme/schedule data. The partners don't even have to publish the data in the same formats, just agree the ontologies and data formats to allow apps to do transforms and comparisons more easily between sets of data. That's more what I'm getting it. Call me a dreamer... > > I think the BBC has given up trying to do that even internally, and > instead relies on being able to map piece of data A in system X on to > piece of data B in systemY, and be reasonably sure they're the same > thing. Isn't that what an ontology is supposed to do? If so, why not just write it down? But yes, I understand why even the simplest thing might turn into a major nightmare. > > I really get the feeling that 95% accurate mappings between different > ways of describing stuff is the best we can hope for. The suggestion > of gentle harmonisation is preferable to 'having to do it X way always > or else' in any big organisation. And, in fact, any system involving > fallible meatbags doing data entry. > > This is coloured by having spent some time up to my elbows in SMEF and > datamodelling at the BBC, and also by trying to persuade editorial > teams to enter their HTML metadata vaguely consistently. > http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/smef/ I agree, the problems of the real world do get in the way, and stuff needs to get done. The only thing is that, great though mashups are, they tend to be incredibly ad hoc, so when the slightest thing changes, lots of developers pipe up aying things like, "oh look my feed aggregator or somesuch has just died a death because they've changed the feed format". Some things never change, do they? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
