Image of Stephen Wolfram via Wikipedia

British-born computer scientist Stephen Wolfram sees ongoing efforts to extend the Internet’s top-level domains (TLDs) beyond the familiar .com, .org, .uk etc as an opportunity to raise the profile of machine-readable data. In a blog post published yesterday, he argues that a new .data domain would increase “exposure of data on the internet—and [provide] added impetus for organizations to expose data in a way that can efficiently be found and accessed.” Whilst wholly in favour of Wolfram’s stated aim, I can’t help feeling that his suggested solution is at best unnecessary and at worst a worrying segregration of data from the ‘proper’ web that everyone else will continue to exploit.

Back in June of last year, the body responsible for coordinating the global domain name system approved a plan to permit new top-level domains (the letters after the final dot in an internet address — the .com in cloudofdata.com, the .uk in bbc.co.uk, the .edu in harvard.edu). Until recently, these top-level domains have been tightly controlled, with a small set of generic domains (.edu, .gov, .mil, .org, etc), a larger set of country domains (.uk, .fi, .nz, etc) and one or two others such as .eu. From tomorrow, anyone with $185,000 will be able to submit a proposal to create and manage a new top level domain, and it’s possible that there could eventually be thousands of them. Wolfram is keen to ensure that data doesn’t miss out on the ‘opportunity.’

As Wolfram himself recognises, there is already an awful lot of machine-readable data on the web. Some of it sits embedded within the web pages that humans read, with specially formatted code waiting to be triggered by the calendars, the address books, or the browser plugins of site visitors. Some of it is packaged up in data files, offered for download. And some of it waits inside a database, ready to be delivered in response to an API call or a query typed into a web form.

There is a growing enthusiasm for exposing this data for reuse. Government transparency agendas have driven public sector data sites like data.gov.uk and data.gov. Similarly, efforts such as data.open.ac.uk and data.southampton.ac.uk see universities beginning to consciously collect data sets together and offer them up for reuse. Similar efforts in the commercial world are less easy to point to, but that reticence has nothing whatsoever to do with the lack of a ford.data, boeing.data, ge.data or astrazeneca.data domain!

In some ways, the convention for gathering significant chunks of data on a data.xxx.yyy site echoes Wolfram’s intention, but with a number of advantages. Data without context is far less valuable than data with context. Much of that context may be inferred from the domain in which the data lives, with data delivered from a .gov or .edu (or .gov.uk or .ac.uk) site perhaps interpreted differently to data hosted on .com, .biz, or .xxx. Southampton University, the Open University, and the US Federal Government are able to gather data up and make it available for download via their existing data. sites if they choose. This offers human visitors to their sites a degree of convenience, whilst retaining the power and brand attributes of their existing domain. Gov.data, gov.uk.data, open.ac.uk.data, southampton.ac.uk.data, though? All are messy, in ways that Wolfram’s own wolfram.data would admittedly not be, and all are simply additional registrations that the institutions would have to pay for in order to stop someone else grabbing the domain.

At the end of the day, the machines don’t actually care. The existing data.open.ac.uk-type sites are human conveniences, not machine enablers. The computers, and the software they run, are quite capable of crawling the public web and finding accessible data wherever it lies on a site. There are plenty of reasons to continue embedding little snippets of data inside human readable web pages, regardless of whether you have a data.wolfram.com or a wolfram.data site. Content negotiation is becoming increasingly capable, such that there really is no need for what Wolfram calls a ‘parallel construct to the ordinary web’ at all. A human being arriving at a web site sees human readable content, whilst various software tools would automatically be presented with very different data or functions, optimised to their capabilities and requirements.

By all means, let us show the curious some of the existing techniques that work in making data more easily accessible. By all means, let us identify the gaps, the issues, the problems (none of which a new TLD even begins to address). Yes, let us definitely and unambiguously set about “highlighting the exposure of data on the internet—and providing added impetus for organizations to expose data in a way that can efficiently be found and accessed.”

But please, let us not be distracted by the false hope that adding yet another TLD to the babel that ICANN is about to unleash can do anything more than consign data to some online ghetto, wallowing unwanted, unloved and unused as companies and their customers lavish love, attention, and clicks upon the .com domain over on the ‘proper’ web.

Thanks to Raphaël Troncy, whose tweet first drew the story to my attention.

Related articles

• Is It Time For Computers To Have Their Own .Data Domains? (techcrunch.com)
• ICANN Pushes Ahead With January 12 Launch For New Top-Level Domains (wired.com)
• The biggest change in DNS since Dot-Com (wired.com)

Image via Wikipedia

For real-world applications of Linked Data and the Semantic Web, the long-running Semantic Technology Conference is hard to beat. For getting a real handle on the Cloud Computing landscape, GigaOM‘s Structure Conference is also a leading light.

Working across both areas as I do, these events tend to figure prominently in my calendar for the year*. Last year, both took place in San Francisco during the same week. I tried to attend both, and therefore succeeded in spending most of my week in cabs, shuttling between meetings at the two venues. I saw very few sessions that I wasn’t personally involved in, and the experience wasn’t a huge success.

This year the conference organisers have taken pity on me, and moved their events to opposite ends of June. The Semantic Technology Conference is up first, back at the Hilton Union Square from 5-9 June. Structure follows, returning to the Mission Bay Conference Centre on 22 and 23 June.

I’ll be attending both, and probably doing various official things during each event. At the moment, the only thing we’ve definitely nailed down is a special live appearance by The Semantic Link crew on the evening of 5 June; we’ll be taking a look at the highlights expected for the conference, offering some tips for those new to the event and its multitude of parallel sessions, and generally bringing our usual podcast chatter to the stage.

So if you’re in town around the time of either event, do get in touch; it promises to be an interesting month.

* Disclosure: WebMediaBrands pay me to host the monthly Semantic Link podcast, and to write a monthly column on SemanticWeb.com. GigaOM pay me to curate the Infrastructure/ Cloud Computing channel on their Pro site. I attended and participated in both of these events before that was the case, and still would today without the contractual relationship.

Related articles

• GigaOM Structure 2011 (datacenterknowledge.com)
• Semantic Technology Conference (fakeiitian.com)

• My latest monthly column on SemanticWeb.com; Big Data Presents a Big Opportunity?
• My latest weekly wrap-up on GigaOMPro; Rosslyn Analytics, Microsoft Finding Value in Data Aggregation
• The teaser piece on GigaOM’s public Cloud site; In Exploiting the Data Market, Trust Is Key

I spot a theme building…

Krista Thomas was responsible for marketing at Thomson Reuters‘ semantic technology success story, Open Calais, and is now VP Marketing at Los Angeles startup Ad.ly.

Scott Brinker is President & CTO at ion interactive, and writes the ChiefMarTec blog.

During the conversation, regulars and guests discuss the way in which ‘semantic technology’ solutions are being successfully marketed to potential beneficiaries.

Have a listen, and learn that pitches to non-semantic technology enthusiasts beginning “We’ll convert all your data to RDF, leverage the Semantic Web, and construct an OWL-based ontology” are probably doomed to failure.

The whole team is present once more, and we start the show discussing the implications of Drupal 7 and its newly formalised RDFa-publishing capabilities. Unlike regular semantic technology solutions, which someone has to consciously procure as a Semantic Technology solution, Drupal is first and foremost a (popular, free) Content Management System; the semantic smarts come for free, and therefore reach a massive new audience.

From there, we move into a broader discussion of the ways in which semantic projects take root within organisations.

Have a listen, and let us know what you think. As ever, suggestions for future topics or guests are always welcome.

@theSemanticLink is the show’s Twitter id, which we will use to invite questions ahead of shows on particular topics. If you’d like to ask questions, comment on shows, hear about new episodes as they’re released, etc, please do sign up to follow.

Related articles

• The Semantic Link is open (cloudofdata.com)
• Drupal 7 Released, With Improved UI and Semantic Technology (nytimes.com)
• House.gov moves to Drupal (radar.oreilly.com)
• Dries Buytaert Explains How Drupal Gardens SaaS Can Contribute to Semantic Web Momentum – semanticweb.com (semanticweb.com)
• Drupal 7 dives into machine-readable web (go.theregister.com)

We recorded the first episode earlier this week and it’s now online, along with an introduction to the series from myself.

Please do have a listen, and let me know what you think whilst I work out how to automate adding these to my sidebar on this site…

I look forward to lining up some great conversations – and guests – in the year ahead. We will record and publish regularly each month. Where we can agree a topic well ahead of the recording date, I’ll let you know via the @TheSemanticLink twitter account, and invite questions for me to throw at both regulars and guests.

If there are particular topics you’d like to see covered, particular guests you’d like us to secure, or other comments you’d like to make, please do let me know…

Related articles

• Top 10 Semantic Web Products of 2010 (readwriteweb.com)
• Looking forward to The Semantic Link podcast on SemanticWeb.com (cloudofdata.com)

Almost exactly two years ago, I announced my intention to leave Talis and strike out on my own. A year ago, the final piece of that transition concluded when we published the last episode of the Semantic Web Gang; a round table podcast that I began inside Talis and subsequently produced with their sponsorship.

Fast forward to the end of 2010, and it’s time to revisit the value that a monthly round table conversation offered to the community. Talking with friends, customers and contacts, many of them pointed to the useful role that something like the round table discussion format plays in cutting through marketing hype, community groupthink and competitor obfuscation. The old Semantic Web Gang did that, and it did it because it comprised a great group of contributors who knew their stuff.

Working with Eric Franzon at semanticweb.com we are about to recreate some of that value by launching The Semantic Link, and I am really pleased with the panel of regulars that Eric and I have signed up; a completely new group of contributors who also know their stuff.

Our first episode will be recorded in early December, and should be pushed out via semanticweb.com (and iTunes, no doubt) before Christmas. We’ll then settle down to a regular cycle, recording and publishing each month, dissecting whichever trends, stories, initiatives and companies happen to be topical. I’m also keen to get guests on the show from time to time, especially where they’re involved in something truly interesting and newsworthy.

If you have ideas for topics you would like to hear us dissect, please do let me know.

Bill’s slides are here, and mine are embedded below.

Thanks to Paul for the invite, and to the audience for braving an intermittently (very) wet Manchester evening to spend a few hours discussing Linked Data, the Semantic Web, and related topics; it was fun.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google Acquires Metaweb To Make Search Smarter (techcrunch.com)
• Tim Berners-Lee Doesnt Seem to Think Linked Data Requires RDF (ironick.typepad.com)
• CubicWeb – The Semantic Web is a Construction Game!: OSCON 2010, The O’Reilly Open Source Convention – O’Reilly Conferences, July 19 – 23, 2010, Portland, OR (oscon.com)
• 15 sessions on marketing and the semantic web (chiefmartec.com)

A somewhat hectic June concluded with my second trip of the month to California. Whilst the first excursion led to Santa Clara and an interesting insight into attempts by Hitachi Data Systems to reinvent its relationship with the wider community, the second journey took me to San Francisco and a pair of events that lie at the heart of the advances that underpin much of my current work.

The Semantic Technology Conference celebrated its sixth year in 2010, moving from San Jose to the Hilton Union Square in Downtown San Francisco. This was my fourth (I think!) year, and alongside the “30% increase in attendance” to around 1,200, I noticed a refreshing realism amongst presenters, exhibitors and attendees; the hyperbole and inflated expectations of the “Google killers” thankfully seemed mostly to have been replaced by good ideas, sound business models, and steadily growing customer bases. Richard MacManus has been doing a good job of distilling some of the news from the event, and pushing it out on ReadWriteWeb.

Across town at UCSF’s Mission Bay Campus, GigaOM‘s smaller and younger Structure Conference broke out of its previous 1-day format to pack two days with various insights into the shifting Cloud Computing landscape; insights that were reported as they happened on GigaOM and elsewhere, and preserved on video for you to watch at your leisure.

Both events were smoothly run (at least one even brings in the same professional A/V team every year, don’t they Curtiss?), buzzing, and well worth attending. Unfortunately, for me at least, ‘attendance’ meant a near-unending stream of meetings and briefings in and around the venues, rather than much time spent listening to either carefully orchestrated programme. Lining up briefings, meetings and the rest seemed like such a good idea as this trip was planned. Participating in two events simultaneously, I persuaded myself, would be fine. And it mostly was, even though there were definitely times that I couldn’t quite remember where I was. Sitting down with John Hagel, looking blank, then saying “Hmm… so tell me about the Cloud,” was probably not the best way to get started with someone I’d been looking forward to meeting for a very long time. Delayed jetlag from the week before? Jetlag from the outbound flight earlier that same week? MUNI-lag from crossing back and forth between venues? Too much coffee? Not having quite got around to eating that day? Too many appointments in rapid succession? Or just impending senility? Whatever the reason, Hagel coped admirably with his pathetic interviewer’s opening gambit, and we went on to have a great conversation. More on that, his latest book, and his team’s Cloud Computing: Storms on the Horizon paper in due course, I suspect.

Despite starting from very different places (a sizeable chunk of the SemTech audience would not be out of place at an academic conference, whilst most of Structure’s attendees probably stalked the halls of Tim O’Reilly’s earliest Web 2.0 events), the perceived gulf between the real worlds of Cloud Computing and the Semantic Web grows narrower all the time. Companies like Facebook attend one to talk about the Open Graph protocol, and address issues of scale at the other. With Cloud infrastructures’ (yes, that apostrophe is correctly placed) capabilities ever-more commoditised by the day, value and differentiation move toward putting those assets to work in tackling real business challenges; challenges that require data, challenges that depend upon business buy-in, and challenges that benefit from lessons the Semantic Web community has learned in grappling with its transition toward a range of (hopefully) sustainable data businesses.

I have long believed in the fusion of the two (‘Cloud of Data,’ after all), but it was both refreshing and reassuring to observe the growing convergence in hallway conversation at each event. At SemTech, many were reaching toward ‘the Cloud’ (mostly, they meant ‘using Amazon’) in its simplest, purest, form. At Structure, many of those with whom I spoke were reaching for Semantic Technologies and some of Linked Data’s promise, without initially recognising that for which they sought. The Semantic Web, to them, was all too often just a discredited pipe dream from the Web’s distant past. The Semantic Web community of today is a very different place, and one with which Structure’s attendees might find much in common. The danger for the Semantic Web community, of course, is that they once more become absorbed in internal debate or the purity of the model. They may have powerful ideas and technologies to offer, but they need to reach out and describe those in ways that resonate with an industry that is ripe for hearing these messages. Delay too long, or descend too far into re-imagining technical underpinnings, and this fleeting opportunity will be lost; the bright young things of Silicon Valley will just develop something else that does the job almost as well, then iterate rapidly as they mine the flow to observe what works, and what doesn’t.

Personally, I am still absorbing the cacophony of ideas, contacts and opportunities arising from my week in San Francisco, but I am sure that there are plenty of projects, stories, podcasts and other follow-ups to appear here and elsewhere over the next few months.

And finally, an appeal to the organisers; can you locate these events a little closer together next year, please?!

Disclosures: Costs for my trip to Santa Clara were met in full by HDS. Both the Semantic Technology Conference and GigaOM’s Structure Conference supplied Analyst Passes for admission to their events.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Get an Insider’s Knowledge of the Cloud at Structure 2010 (gigaom.com)
• The Value of the Cloud: It’s Not Just About Cost (gigaom.com)
• Semantic Web Gang podcast looks back at the Semantic Technology Conference (zdnet.com)
• Attendance Up 30% at SemTech 2010, the World’s Largest Semantic Technology Conference (prweb.com)
• Facebook & The Semantic Web (downes.ca)
• Velocity, Structure Conference Coverage (datacenterknowledge.com)

We discuss the premise behind the book, and delve into David’s perspective that the ‘semantic web’ is far broader than many have traditionally thought.

During our conversation, we mention the following resources;

• Business Rules Markup Language (BRML)
• Creating Killer Web Sites
• eXtensible Markup Language (XML)
• Futurize Your Enterprise
• GoodRelations, and my podcast with Martin Hepp and Jamie Taylor
• Kayak
• Linked Data
• NeuroCommons
• PubSubHubbub
• Pull
• Pull website
• Resource Discovery Framework (RDF)
• Science Commons
• Secrets of Successful Web Sites
• Universal Product Code (UPC)
• weather.com
• Web Ontology Language (OWL)
• Wolfram Alpha
• World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
• XBRL, and my podcast with Diane Mueller

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Power of Pull (windley.com)
• How the Semantic Web Will Pull the Future Near (nextny.org)
• The Next Web to Be User-Centric (Thoughts on David Siegel’s Pull Book) (semanticsincorporated.com)