IRC log of awwsw on 2010-01-05

Timestamps are in UTC.

14:31:30 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #awwsw
14:31:30 [RRSAgent]
logging to
14:31:57 [mhausenblas]
I think there is a class of tasks that need metadata to operate properly
14:31:58 [dbooth]
jar, perhaps the killer app for metadata is content-type.
14:32:14 [mhausenblas]
from discovery to trust
14:32:34 [mhausenblas]
not sure if I understand dbooth - example?
14:32:46 [mhausenblas]
or do you mean the HTTP header?
14:33:04 [mhausenblas]
14:33:12 [dbooth]
yes, exactly
14:33:18 [mhausenblas]
sorry, you don't know the context
14:33:25 [mhausenblas]
I criticised it recently via Twitter
14:33:33 [mhausenblas]
RSS vs RDF etc.
14:33:34 [dbooth]
14:34:10 [mhausenblas]
14:34:31 [jar]
ok, so metadata in regard to "core web functions" is an angle i hadn't thought about
14:34:48 [jar]
i was thinking more along the lines of itunes
14:34:56 [mhausenblas]
and Geoffrey was so nice explaining it ;)
14:35:13 [mhausenblas]
jar, please define core Web functions :)
14:35:16 [jar]
but data re "core web functions" is not the same as metadata.
14:35:25 [jar]
not is data generally (e.g. linked data)
14:35:41 [jar]
my term for what you were saying... let me find it
14:35:53 [mhausenblas]
hm, this sounds like an artificial distinction to me "but data re "core web functions" is not the same as metadata."
14:36:21 [jar]
metadata is very clearly data about data. canonical example is DC
14:36:27 [jar]
metadata is a subset of all data
14:36:33 [mhausenblas]
14:36:42 [jar]
molecular weight is not metadata, nor is a user's public key
14:36:52 [mhausenblas]
but there is also data about other things such as services
14:36:56 [mhausenblas]
what is a WSDL file?
14:37:04 [jar]
i don't consider that metadata.
14:37:15 [dbooth]
wsdl is not metadata. it's data about a service
14:37:25 [jar]
that's why i suggested "data related to core web functions"
14:37:32 [jar]
some of which is metadata, some of which isn't
14:37:33 [mhausenblas]
wow, then you have a very very very focused definition of metadata. Mine is broader ;)
14:37:43 [jar]
google define:metadata
14:37:48 [jar]
mine is the majority view
14:38:04 [mhausenblas]
ok, jar, I believe you ;)
14:38:16 [dbooth]
but content type seems to me to be exactly metadata: it allows a string of bytes to be re-interpreted for a particular use.
14:38:17 [mhausenblas]
still, what are the core Web functions?
14:38:29 [mhausenblas]
may I ask what a DOAP description then is?
14:38:56 [mhausenblas]
(that is
14:39:14 [mhausenblas]
it's data about a project
14:39:23 [mhausenblas]
aka metadata
14:39:34 [mhausenblas]
or am I totally wrong?
14:40:13 [jar]
i'm fudging in order to characterize what i perceived was your interest. core web functions would include HTTP, authentication, web services, content-type, site-meta, link:, POWDER
14:41:01 [jar]
there's tons of metadata; data about a project qualifies, i think, although there is a slippery slope from the data to the social process that created / will create it
14:41:46 [jar]
i.e. a journal is a data source (social institution), but it corpus to date is data
14:42:32 [mhausenblas]
ok, thanks for the clarification
14:42:39 [jar]
in a proper ontological treatment the two would be distinct entities... but no need to get into that, we could take data sources to be honorary data, if pressed
14:42:52 [mhausenblas]
so, back to your draft 282
14:43:07 [mhausenblas]
how about to start with this sort of definition for metadata
14:43:16 [mhausenblas]
and then discuss the core Web functions
14:43:24 [mhausenblas]
and then list examples for each of these domains?
14:43:47 [jar]
i think we need to start with a menu of potential efforts, listing 3-4 of them, and then pick one effort, and dive in
14:43:48 [mhausenblas]
(if I agree or not re your definition doesn't matter for now )
14:44:02 [mhausenblas]
14:44:08 [mhausenblas]
but why only dive into one?
14:44:21 [jar]
(1) semweb, (2) data re core web functions, (3) classic metadata a la XMP / DC, (4) ...
14:44:28 [mhausenblas]
drop (1)
14:44:30 [jar]
because the topic is too big. ocean-boiling.
14:44:33 [mhausenblas]
14:44:38 [mhausenblas]
still, drop 1 ;)
14:45:01 [mhausenblas]
sorry to say this, but this is something 89% of the audience is not interested in
14:45:03 [jar]
fine, but many people will drag it back in that direction (molecular weight), so it needs to be *explicitly* listed and then dropped
14:45:13 [mhausenblas]
hehe, I see your point
14:45:14 [jar]
14:45:23 [mhausenblas]
this = Semantic Web at large
14:45:43 [mhausenblas]
when we talk about concrete technologies, say RDFa or URIs, fine
14:45:53 [jar]
oh. right. i think we agree.
14:46:08 [mhausenblas]
within certain use cases such as GoodRelations in RDFa yielding a new sort of SEO then people are interested
14:46:11 [mhausenblas]
14:46:40 [jar]
SEO = ?
14:46:49 [mhausenblas]
Search Engine Optimisation
14:46:54 [jar]
don't know GoodRelations
14:47:10 [mhausenblas]
wanna show up in Google on first place? use GR and RDFa ;)
14:47:25 [jar]
ok. so this is why i want it to be content-oriented and application-oriented, not technology-oriented
14:47:27 [mhausenblas]
14:47:32 [jar]
14:47:33 [mhausenblas]
14:47:35 [mhausenblas]
I agree
14:47:50 [jar]
so rdf and rdfa are just generic subroutines you invoke when needed.
14:48:16 [jar]
as is XMP
14:48:32 [mhausenblas]
yeah, sort of - for certain tasks usable but not always and everywhere
14:48:47 [mhausenblas]
or if you contrast Atom with RDF, etc,
14:49:05 [mhausenblas]
ok, so we agree to have it content/app oriented
14:50:23 [mhausenblas]
what is the list of the efforts, now?
14:50:40 [mhausenblas]
1. data re core web functions such as HTTP, auth, trust, etc.
14:50:52 [DanC]
I have very little interest in the "what is metadata?" question. I'm more interested in models of HTTP that help with anarchic scalability; i.e. models that help independently-developed apps work together.
14:51:37 [mhausenblas]
sorry, DanC, this is a bit confusing. I was sort of hijacking this telco into 282 action of jar
14:51:44 [jar]
i'm thinking about what you (mh) said, covering the union of "core web data" (the web as application?) and metadata sensu stricto (itunes exemplar)... i dislike documents that don't have unique focus... but maybe could live with one that is admittedly bifocal; or with two; or with finding some common thread
14:52:16 [mhausenblas]
aha, yes, I see
14:52:23 [jar]
the question is not "what is metadata", it's "what problem do we want to work on"
14:52:35 [jar]
the latter masquerades as the former
14:52:47 [mhausenblas]
and +1 to DanC's distributed app on Web-scale approach
14:53:19 [mhausenblas]
jar was sort of briefing me re metadata, so forget about the question what is metadata, please :)
14:53:31 [jar]
of course. but no open metadata apps are emerging that i can see. so why bother.
14:53:59 [mhausenblas]
hm. wouldn't OpenCalais Freebase and the like fall into this category?
14:54:30 [mhausenblas]
is 1. ok with you jar?
14:54:32 [jar]
freebase open & anarchic??
14:54:42 [mhausenblas]
open sort of
14:54:51 [DanC]
no one project is anarchic; it's the whole that's anarchic
14:54:58 [mhausenblas]
anarchic (maybe internally ;)
14:55:06 [mhausenblas]
yup, agree, DanC
14:55:25 [DanC]
as to why bother: some proposals get the "aboutness" bit wrong. that means a web site owner can't use that technology along with others.
14:55:36 [mhausenblas]
no single entity can be but the collective operations. but one can create rules that allow or disallow certain behaviour
14:55:49 [jar]
well, mosaic both exploited and encouraged anarchy, that's what i meant. you don't need an architecture if there are no integration points
14:56:16 [mhausenblas]
DanC, not sure what you're talking about. Concrete example, please?
14:56:16 [DanC]
integration points for freebase are clients that use it.
14:56:36 [DanC]
i.e. clientXYZ wants to use freebase _and_ OpenCalais
14:56:46 [mhausenblas]
ok, so?
14:57:09 [DanC]
so if freebase and OpenCalais have conflicting models, clientXYZ has a hard life.
14:57:13 [jar]
you think there is or soon will be demand? or that the TAG can be effective at promoting things like this somehow?
14:57:14 [mhausenblas]
both have a linked data interface
14:57:49 [mhausenblas]
or what model are you talking about? the schema? sorry, /me a bit dense as it seems
14:57:50 [DanC]
right... but if one uses to refer to "the web consortium" and the other uses it to refer to "the home page of the web consortium", then life is hard for clientXYZ
14:57:57 [mhausenblas]
14:58:28 [mhausenblas]
anyway, shall we come back to the 4 domains for the 282, jar?
14:58:34 [jar]
this is just RDF semantics. does it need a champion? (not a rhetorical question)
14:59:18 [mhausenblas]
my guess would be: no. the community will sort it out
14:59:20 [DanC]
perhaps that was a bad example... but I think the aboutness stuff is a good example. Maybe not life-changing, but useful in that it keeps coming up on www-tag
14:59:40 [mhausenblas]
I *love* aboutness
14:59:54 [jar]
4 domains. i guess the sensible thing is to keep the 2 we've talked about, what i call "core web" and "metadata sensu stricto", but proceed in parallel with them. maybe split to 2 docs later
15:00:19 [mhausenblas]
my approach is simple: you'll always need a human in the loop (see to disambiguate
15:00:20 [jar]
yes, aboutness is very important, it's the same problem as using URIs to refer, and is addressed by RDF model theory
15:00:29 [mhausenblas]
agree jar
15:00:54 [mhausenblas]
the question is: which ocean? :D
15:00:59 [jar]
yes, i'm trying not to boil the ocean. am desperate to gain focus
15:01:17 [jar]
larry masinter favors the "metadata sensu stricto" ocean
15:01:21 [mhausenblas]
ok, to a better term for "metadata sensu stricto"
15:01:37 [jar]
the TAG's usual audience would probably be more interested in "core web data"
15:01:55 [jar]
they are just different i think, but with common subroutines
15:02:02 [mhausenblas]
but "metadata sensu stricto" might be a bit over the top, can I have a more casual title for it, plz
15:02:20 [jar]
i would just call it "metadata" except that this confuses everyone outside the library community
15:02:32 [DanC]
umm... "metadata per se"? or "data about digital artifacts"?
15:02:43 [jar]
how about "data about data"
15:02:59 [mhausenblas]
how about bibilographic metadata
15:03:05 [mhausenblas]
hm, to narrow maybe
15:03:12 [jar]
itunes and flickr are bibliographic?
15:04:26 [mhausenblas]
on the other hand digital articats reminds me on MPEG21
15:04:54 [mhausenblas]
15:05:14 [jar]
data about documents (where 'document' is term of art including images, audio, video) ?
15:05:20 [DanC]
15:05:38 [mhausenblas]
ok, I guess I can live with that
15:06:26 [mhausenblas]
lemme quickly get the brainstorm generator hat ... what else ... digital media item, digital artefact, digital asset
15:06:49 [mhausenblas]
blech. let's stick with 'document' ;)
15:07:14 [jar]
well we can figure this out later. that will do for now. so michael, i think we have a way forward, yes? how about this: 1 document with 3 parts (1) content and applications around data about documents-broadly-construed; (2) content and applications around data about "core web functions" (see above); (3) subroutines common to both
15:07:42 [mhausenblas]
sounds like a plan!
15:07:44 [jar]
with the focus on content and applications, e.g. Dan's example above
15:07:49 [mhausenblas]
15:08:15 [mhausenblas]
will you draft that in and then I start to fill in, or ...?
15:09:17 [DanC]
hmm... all 3? I thought you were trying to focus, jar.
15:09:28 [jar]
hmm. i think i can do this in a day or two
15:09:48 [DanC]
oh... it's mostly 2 areas.
15:09:52 [jar]
i want to focus but am indecisive and i believe i'm being asked to do both... also mh is volunteering :)
15:10:17 [jar]
any, 3 is common, so is properly part of 1 and 2, so really there are only 2 oceans
15:10:23 [mhausenblas]
15:11:06 [mhausenblas]
ok, I think I'm gonna call it a day (re IRC) and head out to my next meeting
15:11:13 [jar]
ok me too.
15:11:22 [jar]
rrsagent, make logs public
15:11:28 [jar]
rrsagent, pointer
15:11:28 [RRSAgent]
15:11:52 [mhausenblas]
thanks for the enlightening discussion and lemme know when I can start to input, jar, please
15:12:00 [jar]
ok will do
15:12:15 [mhausenblas]
RRSAgent, draft minutes
15:12:15 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate mhausenblas
15:26:58 [dbooth]
I have to leave. bye!
16:32:18 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #awwsw