incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From dsh <>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Linda
Date Mon, 19 Nov 2012 05:53:38 GMT
A few comments in regards to the proposal draft and "linked data"

* maybe consider calling out that you are striving towards implementing the
Linked Data Platform 1.0 W3C draft (at least that's how I understand the
* will Linda (or whatever name you'll choose) cover data governance aspects
too. right now to me it looks like the assumption is that data is already
"normalized" where enterprise data usually isn't in real life. That's why
you have ETL processes and data governance models. That actually
contradicts one of Berners-Lee statements in the Ted talk. I wouldn't
assume that enterprises won't open their data because they want to keep it
secret I would rather assume that there's a huge leap step towards
transforming legacy data into usable (whatever that means in practice)
linked data. Maybe how to transform legacy data into open linked data is
even research subject. So my question is: will Linda be focusing on such
data governance aspects too (it looks like LMF covers that aspect at least
a bit in a wiki article)?


On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Benson Margulies <>wrote:

> Ted,
> I did read the whole thing, and I'd like to join you in drawing a
> curtain in front of the man.
> The proposers of this project didn't create the problem of the term
> 'linked data', and they can't fix it. As you suggest, all they can do
> is pick a TLP name that is neutral to positive in relation to it.
> Since they've already signed up for finding some other girl, boy, or
> dinosaur to take to the dance here,  I think we can leave the question
> of the badness of the phrase 'linked data' behind.
> --benson
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message