To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx |
Date: | Wed, 1 Apr 2009 22:36:55 +0100 |
Message-id: | <c09b00eb0904011436l650f9610hb8056c97280d7fc6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Chris and Peter I do not read the same as you do Azamat's post on this occasion pointless spats are unnecessary, however on this list, open critique that often ends up in offensive spats is commonplance, and not even remotely moderated (even when they become direct, deliberate, vile and unmotivated personal attacks) I can understand that paying lip service to those who hold the strings of the EU funding purse, (to which many on this list are trying to get to), can pay off, that could explain the sudden urge for moderation interventions I hope that nobody is trying to diminish the credibility of scientists and researchers, many of whom are friends and colleagues, even when we think their work is not useful to us What seems to me is at the heart of this discussion, or where inevitable it seem to point to is that much of funded projects and research on semantic web (neon happens to be one of them, nothing personal) have been developed with great expenditure of public funding, without enough benefits, There is agreement that OWL standard, for example, which is far from being a practically useful and has a lot of limitations, but a lot of public money is being funnelled into projects that revolve around OWL, How can the research community justify such poor planning other than by hiding from public discussions? So we have millions, billions, being spent developing soemthing that is of limited usage. that's what I think is causing frustration, and perhaps results in what may sound offensive especially to those who may have a chip on the shoulder I am personally try to make the most of what is around, and learn as much as I can, but the weaknesses of these technologies and the waste of resources, such as tons of duplicate tools around which overlap in functionality, and neither of them makes it any easier for us to actually geetting down to make the semantic web vision closer for us why is that? i would say its because too many people who have made decisions so far are rather touchy about this, and refuse to take responsibility, and try to get more money out of the system That is not say that I understand the alternatives any better, but thats another post PDM On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- Paola Di Maio, **************************************** Forthcoming IEEE/DEST 09 Collective Intelligence Track (deadline extended) i-Semantics 2009, 2 - 4 September 2009, Graz, Austria. www.i-semantics.tugraz.at SEMAPRO 2009, Malta http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPSEMAPRO09.html ************************************************** Mae Fah Luang Child Protection Project, Chiang Rai Thailand _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01) |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [ontolog-forum] Ontolog mission [was - Fwd: NeOn projct goals], Peter Yim |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] semantics of the mKR language, Peter Yim |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] semantics of the mKR language, Christopher Menzel |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] semantics of the mKR language, Peter Yim |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |