Sherman Monroe wrote:
Kingsley,

Well said. After all, we preach interoperability and standards to an industry driven by concept of isolate & conquer. In all seriousness, if we are to have any real chance of overcoming the impetus of proprietary interests, then we must first achieve some semblance of solidarity within the ranks of our own community. Yet, some of the initiatives and territorial projects that surface clearly duplicate efforts and at times lack interoperability with similar efforts; in the process, precious focus and energy is wasted. The notion of "standing on the shoulders of your fellows" is frustratingly lacking whereas it should be one of our guiding principles. It is in our interests to coordinate similar efforts, and diligently seek points of synergies were none are apparent. Competition within the community should be shunned and hissed at, seriously. Failure to align our efforts will weaken our collective effort, and cause us to bump against the same walls we're trying to bring down. LOD is fundamentally a revolution in thinking, from a value on competition and silos to the recognition of a much greater value in co-opetition and interoperbility; that revolution must catch fire within the minds of each LODC member before it has a chance of spreading to the rest of the industry. The question each of us should ask ourselves is, do I really believe in what LOD is about? The rest of the industry must be able to look to us as an example of LOD principles at work.

-sherman
Amen!

Homogeneity of purpose must be matched with actions, we have to dog-food every aspect of Linked Data :-)

BTW - Any comments re. the UI matters we are discussing? I ask because you've felt the pain our service alleviates, first hand, based your experience re. Cypher atop DBpedia.

Kingsley



On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Kingsley Idehen <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:


    On 4/22/09 10:24 PM, "Mike Bergman" <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    > This has been a classic case of Cool Hand Luke and a failure to
    > communicate.  Indeed, it happens all of the time in this forum.
    >
    > David comes from a perspective of usability and user interfaces,
    > granted with a JS bias.  Most all of us have recognized his
    > genius for quite some time, and he is a leading innovator in such
    > data presentation.
    >
    > Kingsley has been a passionate advocate for data connectivity and
    > overcoming all things "silo".  Middleware is his game (and OL's).
    >   Data and manipulating data is his perspective, and we know the
    > superior infrastructure that his personal and then corporate
    > commitments to these issues have brought.
    >
    > Benjamin notes today the difference in perspective.  Does it
    > begin with the user experience, or does it begin with the data?
    >
    > The answer, of course, is Yes.
    >
    > David with JSON and MQL and other things FB might be criticized.
    >   As he knows, I have done so personally offline and directly.
    >
    > Kingsley might be criticized for facile hand-waving at UI and
    > usability questions; he, too, knows I have made those points
    > privately.
    >
    > I truly don't know what our "community" really is or, if indeed,
    > we even have one.  But I do know this:
    >
    > All of us work on these issues because we believe in them and
    > have passion.  So, I have a simple suggestion:
    >
    > Keep looking outward.  We need to talk and speak to the
    > "unaffiliated".  In that regard, David has the upper hand because
    > presentation and flash will always be easier to understand for
    > the non-cognescenti.  But, David, you know this too:  your job is
    > easier if the nature of the data and its structure drives your
    > display.
    >
    > There are HUGE, HUGE advantages of data driving interfaces and
    > usability that neither of you are discussing.  Let's next turn
    > our attention there and gain some major wins at no cost.
    >
    > Mike

    Mike,

    First part of this response is to the LOD community in general:

    There is a fundamental point that permeates all my communications
    about UI
    and Data Access, and the more recent realm of Linked Data. It
    simply comes
    down to this:

    Data Presentation, Data Representation, Data Access, and Data
    Storage are
    all distinct items. Each of these realms is a domain of expertise
    in its own
    right.

    What Linked Data really and truly addresses is the ability to abstract
    these distinct realms via HTTP based URIs that deliver the "*"
    (reference/name) and "&" (address/location) of the 'C' programming
    language
    (simple anecdote) in a manner that truly transcends platforms due
    to the
    Web's ubiquity.

    I've already completed one iteration of the standards compliant
    data access
    and application binding via ODBC, JDBC, OLE-DB, and ADO.NET
    <http://ADO.NET> etc.. but these
    approaches all suffered from the pain of data access specific
    protocols and
    representations (XDR hell) albeit encapsulated in the Driver
    implementation
    work. Even worse, ODBC/JDBC/OLE-DB/ADO.NET <http://ADO.NET>
    compliant applications all
    suffered from presentation layer specificity (each App has their
    own prior
    to the emergence of HTML and XML+XSLT+CSS), so you had to buy a Report
    Writer package (or similar desktop productivity tool) to get decent
    presentation from your DBMS independent data access driver etc..

    The point I am trying to make above is this: ODBC Drivers
    development and
    ODBC compliant application development were/are distinct
    activities with
    distinct specializations. And although these platform specific and
    DBMS
    model specific APIs have issues (as outlined above), the do unveil
    a very
    important virtue that the Linked Data community can only benefit
    from i.e.,
    know your area of expertise, and maximize it by channeling your
    effort to
    the relevant side of a  critical standard.

    Taking OpenLink as an example, we can truly do many things, but our
    strategic focus is data access middleware and data management.
    That's what
    the company has been equipped to do very well since  inception.
    What we
    aren't really equipped to do, but have been forced into, as part of an
    effort to contribute to Linked Data Web bootstrap, is full blown UI
    development.  ODE, iSPARQL, OAT, and the rudimentary UI around the
    very
    powerful ODS platform are current examples.

    What I would like to see more of in this community, is the
    coalescing of
    talent around areas of core competence. This is how we will truly
    produce
    coherent game changing output.

    We have a standard, its called: Linked Data, much simpler than
    ODBC, JDBC,
    etc.. And a zillion times more powerful, so lets not impede outbound
    progress by a bizarre inability work together coherently, all we
    have to do
    is work either side of the standard (as stated already).

    For those who think real collaboration isn't possible in this
    realm, along
    the lines I espouse, do note this fact: there isn't a single
    company on this
    planet that could digest a modicum of the potential of Linked Data
    (we are
    dealing with a fractal space), so we aren't in a zero sum competitive
    marketplace, the cake is simply too BIG! Thus, co-opetition (as
    articulate
    by Ray Noorda eons ago) and symbiosis are going to be the defining
    hallmarks
    of all Linked Data oriented markeplaces as we move forward.

    Mike:

    Thanks for your comments, you've provide a nice outlet for me to
    express
    some of my pressing concerns re. our community --- I do believe we
    have one
    :-)



    --


    Regards,

    Kingsley Idehen          Weblog:
    http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
    <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
    President & CEO
    OpenLink Software     Web: http://www.openlinksw.com




    >
    >
    > David Huynh wrote:
    >> Kingsley,
    >>
    >> Thanks for the resources and the detailed explanation! Looks
    like all
    >> the pieces are there!
    >>
    >> David
    >>
    >> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
    >>> David Huynh wrote:
    >>>> Thanks for the link, Juan.
    >>>>
    >>>> Just curious, even if I know SPARQL, how do I (as a new user)
    know
    >>>> which properties and types there are in the data? And what
    URIs to
    >>>> use for what?
    >>> David,
    >>>
    >>> Not speaking for Jaun, but seeking to answer the question you
    posed.
    >>>
    >>> Our iSPARQL interface takes the view that:
    >>>
    >>> 1. You lookup vocabularies and ontologies of interest before
    >>> constructing triple patterns since the terms need to come from
    somewhere
    >>> 2. You then you use the ontology/vocabulary tree to drag and drop
    >>> classes over Subject  and Object nodes
    >>> 3. Do the same thing re. properties by selecting them and dropping
    >>> them over the connectors (predicates)
    >>> 4. Repeat the above until you've completely painted an SPO
    graph of
    >>> what you seek.
    >>>
    >>> BTW - the pattern in steps 2-4 above originated from RDF
    Author, and
    >>> we simply adopted it for SPARQL (following a skype session I
    had with
    >>> Danbri years ago re. the need for SPARQL QBE). Note: RDF Author
    >>> allowed you to write Triples directly into RDF information
    resources
    >>> via their URLs. Which means the same UI works fine for SPARUL
    (writing
    >>> to Quad Store via its internal Graph IRI or Web Information
    Resource
    >>> URL).
    >>>
    >>> Links:
    >>>
    >>> 1.  http://rdfweb.org/people/damian/RDFAuthor/Tutorial/ -- RDF
    Author
    >>>
    >>> Kingsley
    >>>>
    >>>> David
    >>>>
    >>>> Juan Sequeda wrote:
    >>>>> You may want to check out a tool that we are working on: SQUIN
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://squin.informatik.hu-berlin.de/SQUIN/
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Juan Sequeda, Ph.D Student
    >>>>> Dept. of Computer Sciences
    >>>>> The University of Texas at Austin
    >>>>> www.juansequeda.com <http://www.juansequeda.com>
    <http://www.juansequeda.com>
    >>>>> www.semanticwebaustin.org <http://www.semanticwebaustin.org>
    <http://www.semanticwebaustin.org>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:18 PM, David Huynh
    <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    >>>>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
    wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>     Hi all,
    >>>>>
    >>>>>     Admittedly this is somewhat of a tease and shameless
    >>>>>     self-promotion :-) but I think there are a few interesting
    >>>>>     concepts in the query editor for Freebase that I've been
    working
    >>>>>     on that can be very useful for querying and consuming
    LOD data
    >>>>> sets:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>       http://www.freebase.com/app/queryeditor/about
    >>>>>
    >>>>>     Or maybe I missed it totally--is there anything similar for
    >>>>>     writing SPARQL queries over LOD?
    >>>>>
    >>>>>     Cheers,
    >>>>>
    >>>>>     David
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>
    >>
    >>






--

Thanks,
-sherman

I pray that you may prosper in all things and be healthy, even as your soul prospers
(3 John 1:2)


--


Regards,

Kingsley Idehen       Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com





Reply via email to