Sorry Kingsley, I think you've just demonstrated a very risky
assumption. People will just mishear and mis-read and get confused.
Most web programmers look for a good-enough example to copy, not read
the docs.
On 25/01/11 17:09, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 1/25/11 11:59 AM, William Waites wrote:
* [2011-01-25 11:21:45 -0500] Kingsley Idehen<kide...@openlinksw.com> écrit:
] Hmm. Is it the Name or Description that's important?
]
] But what about discerning meaning from the VOAF graph?
Humans looking at documents and trying to understand a system
do so in a very different way from machines. While what you
suggest might be strictly true according to the way RDF and
formal logic work, it isn't the way humans work (otherwise
the strong AI project of the past half-century might have
succeeded by now). So we should try arrange things in a way
that is both consistent with what the machines want and as
easy as possible for humans to understand. That Hugh, an
expert in the domain, had trouble figuring it out due to
poetic references to well known concepts suggests that there
is some room for improvement.
Cheers,
-w
Yes, but does a human say: you lost me at VOAF due to FOAF? I think
they do read the docs, at least the opening paragraph :-)
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web:http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
--
Christopher Gutteridge -- http://id.ecs.soton.ac.uk/person/1248
/ Lead Developer, EPrints Project, http://eprints.org/
/ Web Projects Manager, ECS, University of Southampton,
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/
/ Webmaster, Web Science Trust, http://www.webscience.org/
