Cory wrote: (01)
> Mechanisms for trust and crowd comments on resources should then provide ways
>to know what repositories to trust and those to ignore - based on users
>criteria, not any authority. (02)
I don't think users are going to have the experience necessary to establish
their own selection criteria, and crowd comments should be left to blogs. Back
in the olden days of the Interpedia project [1], this was "solved" by... (03)
... several independent "Seal-of-approval" (SOAP) agencies
were envisioned which would rate Interpedia articles based on criteria
of their own choosing; users could then decide which agencies'
recommendations to follow. (04)
The basic issue came up on the mailing list that there were likely to be
different interpretations of historical events, and some of those will be
considered more "true" than others. All interpretations were welcome, but
there would be some SOAP that show that some were "approved". Your view of the
Interpedia could be limited to only show you those articles that had some
specific seal, or were "blessed" by another group in a "web of trust". (05)
In the end, the project never left the planning stages and finally died,
taken over by the explosive growth of the World Wide Web. (06)
There were implementations of many of the ideas, but was tough working around
limitations of the Gopher protocol. (07)
Joel
[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpedia> (08)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/sio-dev/
Join Community: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sio-dev/
Unsubscribe: mailto:sio-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SIO/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SharingIntegratingOntologies (09)
|