Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of
 sebastian.schaffert@salzburgresearch.at designates 212.183.10.131 as
 permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Linda
From: Sebastian Schaffert <sebastian.schaffert@salzburgresearch.at>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJwFCa3LPaokqnV4jKj8icV_PC9h6LEu=ez2kyE634_vUhmS2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 09:01:50 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <363F5B10-03D8-41B5-BB6B-BAFBBC6484C6@salzburgresearch.at>
References: <ECA2E2AA-1225-4BCA-ADAF-BF07685ECD38@salzburgresearch.at>
 <013A3050-8693-417A-9CC8-48436B09D9BD@gbiv.com>
 <83f362f56d8fb94eb9847d7216b31020@salzburgresearch.at>
 <50A7E0A3.5070500@apache.org>
 <4A7CC6C5-94E1-4BA3-BBF3-30BD01C562DA@salzburgresearch.at>
 <CAJwFCa2T-Sf9sYOZ5vSyJ6r=ZdVL2SwNxXY8hb=dzu33GOkkhA@mail.gmail.com>
 <50A8AE2E.9050208@gmail.com>
 <CAJwFCa3LPaokqnV4jKj8icV_PC9h6LEu=ez2kyE634_vUhmS2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org

Hi Ted,

I read all your mail ( :-) ) and I am sorry that this evolved into such =
a discussion. For me, "Linked Data" is as specific as "Web", "Stack" or =
"Heap", and I would claim it is like this for at least the rest of the =
Web community and possibly the database community as well. But =
regardless what we think about it, fact is the label has been =
established and the time to criticise it would have been 7 years ago. =
With other people, I'd like to say.

I can fully understand your position though: coming from a logics =
background in CS, I had similar concerns with the name "Semantic Web", =
because nothing is really "Semantic" about it. =46rom a logics point of =
view, it is all about symbols, the semantics would require an =
interpretation. I realised that opposing the term doesn't really help, =
though, since the world around me still continued using it. ;-)

So, let's go forward with the constructive part of the discussion. We =
will sit together in about 1 hour and I am sure we come up with a =
solution (one way or the other - if it remains "Linda" we will have good =
arguments for it). And thanks again for rising the legal issue - =
something we will take into the discussion.

Greetings,

Sebastian


Am 18.11.2012 um 21:55 schrieb Ted Dunning:

> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Paolo Castagna =
<castagna.lists@gmail.com>wrote:
>=20
>> ....
>=20
> On 17/11/12 22:49, Ted Dunning wrote:
>>=20
>>> Frankly, the phrase "linked data" is also so generic as to be =
essentially
>>> meaningless outside your community.  There are many, many uses of =
this
>>> phrase in computer science that mean something completely different =
from
>>> what you guys seem to mean.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> Where else is the phrase "linked data" used with a different meaning?
>>=20
>=20
> The problem is that the phrase is generic and can arise in general =
speech.
>=20
> Links and pointers are ubiquitous in computer parlance.  Nothing in =
the
> phrase "linked data" constrains the meaning to *that* kind of link for
> *that* kind of data other than the usage in a relatively small =
community.
>=20
>=20
> What 'those guys' seem to mean is well described in the Linked Data
>> Wikipedia page: =
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Linked_data<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li=
nked_data>
>>=20
>> Please, notice there isn't a disambiguation page. :-)
>>=20
>=20
> That is because the phrase is only used as a proper noun for one =
thing.
> But it is used commonly as a descriptive phrase.
>=20
> The comparable phrase "red flowers" doesn't need a disambiguation link =
in
> wikipedia either because the meaning is apparent as a compositional
> construct.
>=20
>=20
>> The above wiki page seems pretty short and clear to me.
>>=20
>=20
> But the phrase itself is so vanilla that searching on the web to find =
the
> meaning (to a native speaker, anyway) seems kind of pointless.
>=20
> My question was not "what does linked data mean?" because it seemed =
like I
> could come up with ten meanings for the term.  The question was "which =
of
> the many possible meanings are these people talking about?".  Note =
that a
> web search wouldn't answer that question because the existence of a =
common
> usage does not imply that any given community is following that common
> usage pattern.
>=20
> Is there anything  in your opinion which isn't clear and should be =
better
>> explained?
>>=20
>=20
> I think that you are missing the point.
>=20
> The problem is that the phrase itself doesn't have any signal that =
there is
> any nominative usage going on.  If I were speaking German and used the
> English phrase, there would be a very strong signal, but we aren't =
doing
> that.
>=20
> As such, I think that most mentions of "linked data" should include =
some
> such signal.  In a proposal aimed at people outside your community, in
> particular, you need something along the lines "the phrase linked data =
is
> used here idiosyncratically to refer to ...".  If you assume that the
> reader knows what kind of link you mean between what kind of data, =
then the
> documents you produce will tend to be impenetrable.  Assumptions like =
this
> are common within insular communities and commonly lead to
> misunderstandings like this.
>=20
> The phrase "linked data" is composed by two words and the common =
definition
>> of 'linked' (in particular if referred to the Web) and 'data' applies =
here
>> unchanged. If you think at the Web as is big 'library' of linked
>> 'documents', can we do the same also for data, instead of documents? =
How?
>> This is what 'linked data' is all about and what it is trying to =
achieve: a
>> Web of data.
>>=20
>=20
> I get it now.  My point was that your proposal didn't convey this.
>=20
> And I would contend that the common definitions of linked and data =
when
> combined do not unambiguously come up with Linked Data(tm) as you tend =
to
> use the phrase.  With the proper predisposition, it might, but your
> predisposition is not shared universally.  I cite myself as the =
existence
> proof of at least one experienced and active computer scientist who =
had no
> clue what you were going on about.
>=20
> Having a project name that memorializes a phrase that nobody is likely =
to
>>> understand without (lots of) supporting material and which is used =
by
>>> other
>>> projects in roughly the same domain is problematic.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> I disagree.
>>=20
>=20
> Well, you can't disagree that I was confused by your proposal.  I =
don't
> think that you can disagree that a big part of the cause of the =
confusion
> was the use of the generic phrase "linked data" in a highly specific =
way.
>=20
> Take other terms that have succeeded easily:
>=20
>    hyperlink
>=20
>    web log =3D> blog
>=20
>    web page
>=20
>    atomic clock
>=20
> Each of these is essentially a phrase, but one that did not have a =
prior
> common usage.
>=20
>=20
>> The 4 principles are very clear and simple:
>>=20
>> 1. Use URIs as names for things
>> 2. Use HTTP URIs so that people can look up those names.
>> 3. When someone looks up a URI, provide useful information, using the
>> standards (RDF*, SPARQL)
>> 4. Include links to other URIs. so that they can discover more =
things.
>>=20
>> We could debate indefinitely on the "using the standards ..." part, =
but
>> should we do it here?
>>=20
>=20
> No.  You can define things any way you like.  That isn't the point.
>=20
>=20
>> What's isn't clear to you from the four principles above?
>>=20
>=20
> The clarity of the four principles isn't the point.  The clarity of =
the
> phrase "linked data" without somewhat unusual foreknowledge and =
without the
> definition is the point.  A phrase that has to have its definition
> schlepped around with the phrase is hardly very useful.
>=20
>=20
>> You already know what a URI, HTTP URIs, links are. Isn't it? :-)
>>=20
>=20
> Yes.  But you are way out in the weeds here arguing a point that =
doesn't
> need to be made.
>=20
>=20
>> Now, I could have sympathy with you if you point your finger at RDF =
and
>> SPARQL, but,
>=20
>=20
> Ahh... but each of these has names that are clearly not something =
else.
> Thus, if I don't know about triples and such, I still can see that I
> *don't* know what these phrases are.
>=20
> With "linked data", I don't have a clue that I don't know what you are
> talking about.
>=20
>=20
>> ... and clear... and if you want you can always refer to the W3C
>> Recommendations (those are your primary sources of information in =
this
>> case).
>>=20
>=20
> but how would a person know that is where these terms are defined?
> Especially when you are giving them a huge pointer toward blackboard
> systems with the name Linda?
>=20
>=20
>> ...You should be aware, however, that with these defects, it seems =
very
>>=20
>> unlikely to me that Apache would be able to help with trademark and =
name
>>> conflict issues.  That may not seem like a big deal now, but if your
>>> project really does get going and then somebody tries to take over =
your
>>> community with a nearly identically named product, it will =
definitely feel
>>> like a big deal.  Take a look at what happens with Open Office all =
the
>>> time.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> Regarding the name, I have no better suggestion than dropping the =
'n'?
>> Linda --> Lida (but I have not done much research to see if that has
>> problems or not).
>=20
>=20
> How about following the tradition established by the contraction of =
web log
> into blog?
>=20
> That would give "web linked data" =3D> Blinda
>=20
> It is still a female name if you need the gender stereotyping of =
Linda.  It
> seems to have non-English meanings, but certainly has no connotations =
in
> English.  It also seems to have no prior technical usage.

Sebastian
--=20
| Dr. Sebastian Schaffert          =
sebastian.schaffert@salzburgresearch.at
| Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft  =
http://www.salzburgresearch.at
| Head of Knowledge and Media Technologies Group          +43 662 2288 =
423
| Jakob-Haringer Strasse 5/II
| A-5020 Salzburg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org