Tim,

Thanks for your long reply to my question. What you said makes perfect 
sense. Indeed, as much as I can't see myself, or any group, institution, 
or company, write all of my/their documents in Wikipedia, I can't see 
myself or anyone else storing all of my/their data in Google 
Base/Freebase. Their support for social collaboration is nice, though.

David

Tim Churches wrote:
> David Huynh wrote:
>   
>> I'm curious-- have you considered using other technologies/services like
>> Google Base, Ning, ManyEyes, and then the new buzzing FreeBase to
>> manage, visualize, and publish your data? If you have, then why are you
>> not using them in this case? Just curious :-) Thanks.
>>     
>
> ManyEyes I have looked at before and I think it is a very interesting
> development, although obviously it would benefit hugely from the
> availability of semantically annotated quantitative datasets, and from
> visualisation tools which use that semantic annotation to help users
> explore and visualise the data. I've just started work on that for
> epidemiological and population health data. As it stands, I don't think
> that ManyEyes provides sufficiently rich tools to allow others to
> explore other aspects of data - only one or a limited, fairly simplistic
> set of views are available, although the datasets are there to allow
> other views of the same data to be created - but the process for doing
> so it not as spontaneous or as quick as it might be. There also needs to
> be a facility for linking multiple views with a commentary in order to
> tell a story or make a case for a particular evidence-based conclusion
> or assertion. But I digress.
>
> Ning seems to be a social networking facility, not really what we need
> for allowing people to browse and explore information about free, open
> source health software.
>
> FreeBase looks very interesting indeed, in all the ways that Google Base
> is not, but both suffer from the fact that they are, in the end,
> proprietary databases stored on someone else's computer. If FreeBase
> content (meaning all the annotations and relationships which people end
> up adding to content) really are licensed under a Creative Commons
> licenses and there is a way of extracting and moving the data elsewhere
> for re-use or re-purposing, then it may well be a good solution. But at
> the moment they seem to be at an early stage and I haven't been offered
> a test account despite requesting one, so it is hard to tell.
>
> Also, for the purposes of OSHCA, which is an international group
> promoting free, open source software in health, we prefer to use things
> which are themselves free and open source software, like Exhibit. None
> of the others discussed above are.
>
> Tim C
>
>   

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
[email protected]
http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to