Taking theory into practice
As many of you may know - Danny is all about rdf and the upper case semantic web - so Danny uses Dave’s idea to launch into a detailed analysis of the factors that will be needed to implement such an idea. This gives Danny another opportunity to flog his favorite horse, hoping it’ll come around the bend and actually get picked up, deployed and make it to the finish line. Yah gotta love Danny for his determination. But this ain’t a one horse race or even one race.
This doesn’t make what Dave is doing - wrong. Dave has a different angle on this issue and I’m sure he thinks he can build personalzied search - in his OWN way.
I love Danny, and I love Dave - too.
I’m just happy to see Danny and Dave working at this sort of intellectual level - and hope that Danny realizes that for every FOAF - there’s a vCard and XFN. And I hope Dave sees that there are people getting jazzed on his ideas, but that they might wanna implement them THEIR way.
For every particular implemnetation scheme that utilizes X, Y and Z - there are college hackers, Indian and Bulgarian collaborators and entire bevvies of VC funded startups - all trying to do the same thing - but differently utilizing A, B and C.
The on-slaught and growth of the software business has created an enviornment where the exact same solution to the same problem could be solved five entirely different ways. I find that amazing.
That certainly ain’t how it was back in the ’80’s.
Everyday now - almost - I hear of another open source PIM, dashboard BoF, search engine, video tagging tool, new XML language or viral acquisition rumor.
We also hear of acquisitions and consolidation. And who’s right and wrong. And of folks learning how to demo and deal with their ‘betas’. But I can tell you - Yahoo buying Technorati doesn’t solve anything anymore than AOL launching a soical network.
It’s what WE do WITH all this software that counts. Sometimes that’s called content, other times community, still other times profits. It’s sort of like the relationship of a noun to a verb. We both need each other.
Uhh, Marc, my idea wasn’t personalized search.
Problem with this medium is no one reads what the other guy says before they go off and “riff” on it.
You guys want users to enter metadata, I’m looking for ways to get around taht, because I have found that people don’te ven spell things right, much less label things.
Aren’t you the guy who never categorizes his posts? ;->
Sorry.
I know your heart is filled with love, but if youd on’t erad the posts what is it you love so much?
Uhh, Marc, my idea wasn’t personalized search.
Problem with this medium is no one reads what the other guy says before they go off and “riff” on it.
You guys want users to enter metadata, I’m looking for ways to get around taht, because I have found that people don’te ven spell things right, much less label things.
Aren’t you the guy who never categorizes his posts? ;->
Sorry.
I know your heart is filled with love, but if youd on’t erad the posts what is it you love so much?
Uhh, Marc, my idea wasn’t personalized search.
Problem with this medium is no one reads what the other guy says before they go off and “riff” on it.
You guys want users to enter metadata, I’m looking for ways to get around taht, because I have found that people don’te ven spell things right, much less label things.
Aren’t you the guy who never categorizes his posts? ;->
Sorry.
I know your heart is filled with love, but if youd on’t erad the posts what is it you love so much?
Marc, I agree entirely on your main points, it is interesting (and good) that any given problem can (and probably will) be solved in many different ways. Like you say: “This doesn’t make what Dave is doing - wrong”. There is an important side-point - that when we’re talking about implementing things on the web, to properly get the benefit of the network some attention needs to be paid to working against established standards to enable interop, rather than focussing on application-level interop. Your compatibility-matrix approach can certainly help loads here.
Dave, personalised search may not be the best description of the general idea, but I think it does apply in the piece of your blog post I quoted - all you write about on your blog is cars and you want search results to prioritise car-related information. The common factor is your personal interest in cars.
re. “You guys want users to enter metadata” - explicit metadata is certainly useful, but if you read my post you’ll see that categorization/tagging/labelling is only one aspect mentioned. I agree totally that it’s good to reduce the amount of user effort required to derive associations between resources.
Marc, I agree entirely on your main points, it is interesting (and good) that any given problem can (and probably will) be solved in many different ways. Like you say: “This doesn’t make what Dave is doing - wrong”. There is an important side-point - that when we’re talking about implementing things on the web, to properly get the benefit of the network some attention needs to be paid to working against established standards to enable interop, rather than focussing on application-level interop. Your compatibility-matrix approach can certainly help loads here.
Dave, personalised search may not be the best description of the general idea, but I think it does apply in the piece of your blog post I quoted - all you write about on your blog is cars and you want search results to prioritise car-related information. The common factor is your personal interest in cars.
re. “You guys want users to enter metadata” - explicit metadata is certainly useful, but if you read my post you’ll see that categorization/tagging/labelling is only one aspect mentioned. I agree totally that it’s good to reduce the amount of user effort required to derive associations between resources.
Marc, I agree entirely on your main points, it is interesting (and good) that any given problem can (and probably will) be solved in many different ways. Like you say: “This doesn’t make what Dave is doing - wrong”. There is an important side-point - that when we’re talking about implementing things on the web, to properly get the benefit of the network some attention needs to be paid to working against established standards to enable interop, rather than focussing on application-level interop. Your compatibility-matrix approach can certainly help loads here.
Dave, personalised search may not be the best description of the general idea, but I think it does apply in the piece of your blog post I quoted - all you write about on your blog is cars and you want search results to prioritise car-related information. The common factor is your personal interest in cars.
re. “You guys want users to enter metadata” - explicit metadata is certainly useful, but if you read my post you’ll see that categorization/tagging/labelling is only one aspect mentioned. I agree totally that it’s good to reduce the amount of user effort required to derive associations between resources.
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
Coffee
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
Coffee
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
Coffee
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
banff hotels
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
banff hotels
Very good site! I like it! Thanks!
banff hotels
google pr main
google pr main
google pr main
online directory main
online directory main
online directory main
Keep a good job up!
Keep a good job up!
Keep a good job up!