On Aug 24, 2011, at 8:01, Damian Steer wrote:
>
> On 24 Aug 2011, at 15:40, David Wood wrote:
>
>> On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick wrote:
Either "Linked Data ecosystem" or "linked data Ecosystem" is a dangerously
>>>
On 24 Aug 2011, at 15:40, David Wood wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick wrote:
>>> Either "Linked Data ecosystem" or "linked data Ecosystem" is a dangerously
>>> flawed paradigm, IMHO. You don't "improve" MeSH by
>>> fla
Hi,
On 24 August 2011 15:40, David Wood wrote:
> On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick wrote:
>>> Either "Linked Data ecosystem" or "linked data Ecosystem" is a dangerously
>>> flawed paradigm, IMHO. You don't "improve" MeSH by
>>> fl
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick wrote:
>> Either "Linked Data ecosystem" or "linked data Ecosystem" is a dangerously
>> flawed paradigm, IMHO. You don't "improve" MeSH by
>> flattening it, for example, it is what it is. Since CAS num
Hi,
On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick wrote:
> Either "Linked Data ecosystem" or "linked data Ecosystem" is a dangerously
> flawed paradigm, IMHO. You don't "improve" MeSH by
> flattening it, for example, it is what it is. Since CAS numbers are not a
> directed graph, an algorithmic transfo
--- On Tue, 8/23/11, Patrick Durusau wrote:
"The fact remains that even if we switched (miraculously) today to all
new URI identifiers, we will be accessing literature using prior
identifiers for a very long time. I suspect hundreds of years."
Somewhere around 1890, I think, the amount of publ
CAS, DUNS and LOD (was Re: Cost/Benefit Anyone? Re: Vote for my
> Semantic Web presentation at SXSW)
> To: public-lod@w3.org
> Date: Tuesday, August 23, 2011, 8:05 AM
> This is an important discussion that
> (I believe) foreshadows how
> canonical identifiers are managed moving
John
On 8/23/2011 9:05 AM, John Erickson wrote:
This is an important discussion that (I believe) foreshadows how
canonical identifiers are managed moving forward.
Both CAS and DUNS numbers are a good example. Consider the challenge
of linking EPA data; it's easy to create a list of toxic chemic
This is an important discussion that (I believe) foreshadows how
canonical identifiers are managed moving forward.
Both CAS and DUNS numbers are a good example. Consider the challenge
of linking EPA data; it's easy to create a list of toxic chemicals
that are common across many EPA datasets. Based
David,
On 8/22/2011 9:55 PM, David Booth wrote:
On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 20:27 -0400, Patrick Durusau wrote:
[ . . . ]
The use of CAS identifiers supports searching across vast domains of
*existing* literature. Not all, but most of it for the last 60 or so
years.
That is non-trivial and should no
On Mon, 2011-08-22 at 20:27 -0400, Patrick Durusau wrote:
[ . . . ]
> The use of CAS identifiers supports searching across vast domains of
> *existing* literature. Not all, but most of it for the last 60 or so
> years.
>
> That is non-trivial and should not be lightly discarded.
>
> BTW, your ob
David,
On 8/22/2011 7:39 PM, David Wood wrote:
Hi all,
On Aug 19, 2011, at 06:37, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Case in point, CAS, http://www.cas.org/. Coming up on 62 million
organic and inorganic substances given unique identifiers. What is
the incentive for any of their users/customers to switch
Hi all,
On Aug 19, 2011, at 06:37, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Case in point, CAS, http://www.cas.org/. Coming up on 62 million organic and
> inorganic substances given unique identifiers. What is the incentive for any
> of their users/customers to switch to Linked Data?
Well, for one thing, CAS (
As fascinating as this discussion is, maybe the two of you want to
work it out directly and then report back with a summary?
Speaking as just one subscriber's data point, of course, I'm...
-Patrick
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Kingsley,
>
> Correction: I have never
Kingsley,
Correction: I have never accused you of being modest or of not being an
accountant. ;-)
Nor have I said the costs you talk about in your accountant voice don't
exist.
The problem is identifying the cost to a particular client, say of email
spam, versus the cost the solution for t
On 8/19/11 6:37 AM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
One more attempt.
The "press release" I pointed to was an example that would have to be
particularized to a CIO or CTO in term of *their* expenses of
integration, then showing *their* savings.
Yes, and I sent you a link to a collection of
Kingsley,
One more attempt.
The "press release" I pointed to was an example that would have to be
particularized to a CIO or CTO in term of *their* expenses of
integration, then showing *their* savings.
The difference in our positions, from my "context," is that I am saying
the benefit to e
On 8/18/11 5:27 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
Citing your own bookmark file hardly qualifies as market numbers.
My own bookmark? I gave you a URL to a bookmark collection. The
collection contains links for a variety of research documents.
People promoting technologies make up all so
Bob,
On 8/18/2011 4:29 PM, Bob Ferris wrote:
Just an example from practise:
http://blog.seevl.net/2011/08/18/about-json-ld-and-content-negotiation/
near the end of this blog post:
"... Then, we save costs." - that's it! ;)
You mean where the post says:
Then, *we save costs*. By implementi
Kingsley,
Citing your own bookmark file hardly qualifies as market numbers. People
promoting technologies make up all sorts of numbers about what use of X
will save. Reminds me of the music or software theft numbers. They have
no relationship to any reality that I share.
It's been enjoyable
Just an example from practise:
http://blog.seevl.net/2011/08/18/about-json-ld-and-content-negotiation/
near the end of this blog post:
"... Then, we save costs." - that's it! ;)
Cheers,
Bo
On 8/18/11 2:50 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
On 8/18/2011 1:52 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 8/18/11 1:40 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
From below:
This critical value only materializes via appropriate "context
lenses". For decision makers it is always via opportunity costs.
Kingsley,
On 8/18/2011 2:25 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 8/18/11 2:03 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
Here are some hard numbers on integration of data benefits:
Future Integration Needs: Emerging Complex Data -
http://www.informatica.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/08182011_aberd
Kingsley,
On 8/18/2011 1:52 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 8/18/11 1:40 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
From below:
This critical value only materializes via appropriate "context
lenses". For decision makers it is always via opportunity costs. If
someone else is eating you lunch by dis
On 8/18/11 2:03 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
Here are some hard numbers on integration of data benefits:
Future Integration Needs: Emerging Complex Data -
http://www.informatica.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/08182011_aberdeen_b2b.aspx
*/Integration costs are rising/* -- As int
Kingsley,
Here are some hard numbers on integration of data benefits:
Future Integration Needs: Emerging Complex Data -
http://www.informatica.com/news_events/press_releases/Pages/08182011_aberdeen_b2b.aspx
*/Integration costs are rising/* -- As integration of external data
rises, it continu
On 8/18/11 1:40 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
From below:
This critical value only materializes via appropriate "context
lenses". For decision makers it is always via opportunity costs. If
someone else is eating you lunch by disrupting your market you simply
have to respond. Thus, on
Kingsley,
From below:
This critical value only materializes via appropriate "context
lenses". For decision makers it is always via opportunity costs. If
someone else is eating you lunch by disrupting your market you simply
have to respond. Thus, on this side of the fence its better to focus
On 8/18/11 10:25 AM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Kingsley,
Your characterization of "problems" is spot on:
On 8/18/2011 9:01 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Linked Data addresses many real world problems. The trouble is that
problems are subjective. If you have experienced a problem it doesn't
exist
Kingsley,
Your characterization of "problems" is spot on:
On 8/18/2011 9:01 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Linked Data addresses many real world problems. The trouble is that
problems are subjective. If you have experienced a problem it doesn't
exist. If you don't understand a problem it doesn'
30 matches
Mail list logo