Hi,
On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick gannon_d...@yahoo.com 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
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds leigh.do...@talis.com wrote:
Hi,
On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick gannon_d...@yahoo.com 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
Hi,
On 24 August 2011 15:40, David Wood da...@3roundstones.com wrote:
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds leigh.do...@talis.com wrote:
Hi,
On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick gannon_d...@yahoo.com wrote:
Either Linked Data ecosystem or linked data Ecosystem is a dangerously
flawed
On 24 Aug 2011, at 15:40, David Wood wrote:
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds leigh.do...@talis.com wrote:
Hi,
On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick gannon_d...@yahoo.com wrote:
Either Linked Data ecosystem or linked data Ecosystem is a dangerously
flawed paradigm, IMHO. You don't
On Aug 24, 2011, at 8:01, Damian Steer d.st...@bristol.ac.uk wrote:
On 24 Aug 2011, at 15:40, David Wood wrote:
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:44, Leigh Dodds leigh.do...@talis.com wrote:
Hi,
On 23 August 2011 15:17, Gannon Dick gannon_d...@yahoo.com wrote:
Either Linked Data ecosystem or
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
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.
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
(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 forward.
Both CAS and DUNS numbers
--- On Tue, 8/23/11, Patrick Durusau patr...@durusau.net 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,
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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 patr...@durusau.net wrote:
Kingsley,
Kingsley,
Your characterization of problems is spot on:
On 8/18/2011 9:01 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
snip
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
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:
snip
Linked Data addresses many real world problems. The trouble is that
problems are subjective. If you have experienced a problem it doesn't
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 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,
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
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
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
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 -
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
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
27 matches
Mail list logo
