<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_09_1622200</id>
	<title>Open Data Needs Open Source Tools</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1268155740000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>macslocum writes <i>"Nat Torkington begins <a href="http://radar.oreilly.com/2010/03/truly-open-data.html">sketching out an open data process</a> that borrows liberally from open source tools: 'Open source discourages laziness (because everyone can see the corners you've cut), it can get bugs fixed or at least identified much faster (many eyes), it promotes collaboration, and it's a great training ground for skills development. I see no reason why open data shouldn't bring the same opportunities to data projects. And a lot of data projects need these things. From talking to government folks and scientists, it's become obvious that serious problems exist in some datasets. Sometimes corners were cut in gathering the data, or there's a poor chain of provenance for the data so it's impossible to figure out what's trustworthy and what's not. Sometimes the dataset is delivered as a tarball, then immediately forks as all the users add their new records to their own copy and don't share the additions. Sometimes the dataset is delivered as a tarball but nobody has provided a way for users to collaborate even if they want to. So lately I've been asking myself: What if we applied the best thinking and practices from open source to open data? What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>macslocum writes " Nat Torkington begins sketching out an open data process that borrows liberally from open source tools : 'Open source discourages laziness ( because everyone can see the corners you 've cut ) , it can get bugs fixed or at least identified much faster ( many eyes ) , it promotes collaboration , and it 's a great training ground for skills development .
I see no reason why open data should n't bring the same opportunities to data projects .
And a lot of data projects need these things .
From talking to government folks and scientists , it 's become obvious that serious problems exist in some datasets .
Sometimes corners were cut in gathering the data , or there 's a poor chain of provenance for the data so it 's impossible to figure out what 's trustworthy and what 's not .
Sometimes the dataset is delivered as a tarball , then immediately forks as all the users add their new records to their own copy and do n't share the additions .
Sometimes the dataset is delivered as a tarball but nobody has provided a way for users to collaborate even if they want to .
So lately I 've been asking myself : What if we applied the best thinking and practices from open source to open data ?
What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ?
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>macslocum writes "Nat Torkington begins sketching out an open data process that borrows liberally from open source tools: 'Open source discourages laziness (because everyone can see the corners you've cut), it can get bugs fixed or at least identified much faster (many eyes), it promotes collaboration, and it's a great training ground for skills development.
I see no reason why open data shouldn't bring the same opportunities to data projects.
And a lot of data projects need these things.
From talking to government folks and scientists, it's become obvious that serious problems exist in some datasets.
Sometimes corners were cut in gathering the data, or there's a poor chain of provenance for the data so it's impossible to figure out what's trustworthy and what's not.
Sometimes the dataset is delivered as a tarball, then immediately forks as all the users add their new records to their own copy and don't share the additions.
Sometimes the dataset is delivered as a tarball but nobody has provided a way for users to collaborate even if they want to.
So lately I've been asking myself: What if we applied the best thinking and practices from open source to open data?
What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417172</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1268164200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've said this a thousand times before: Make Wikipedia a P2P project without a single control, and build a cascading network of trust relationships on top of it (think CSS rules, but on articles instead of elements, and one CSS file per user, perhaps including those of others), and you solve all problems with then not-existing central authorities, and so also with censorship.</p><p>The only caveat: People have to learn again, who to trust and who not. (Example of where this fails: Political parties and other groups with advanced social engineering / rhetorics / mass psychology skills, like marketing companies.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've said this a thousand times before : Make Wikipedia a P2P project without a single control , and build a cascading network of trust relationships on top of it ( think CSS rules , but on articles instead of elements , and one CSS file per user , perhaps including those of others ) , and you solve all problems with then not-existing central authorities , and so also with censorship.The only caveat : People have to learn again , who to trust and who not .
( Example of where this fails : Political parties and other groups with advanced social engineering / rhetorics / mass psychology skills , like marketing companies .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've said this a thousand times before: Make Wikipedia a P2P project without a single control, and build a cascading network of trust relationships on top of it (think CSS rules, but on articles instead of elements, and one CSS file per user, perhaps including those of others), and you solve all problems with then not-existing central authorities, and so also with censorship.The only caveat: People have to learn again, who to trust and who not.
(Example of where this fails: Political parties and other groups with advanced social engineering / rhetorics / mass psychology skills, like marketing companies.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417216</id>
	<title>Technical solution to internal issue</title>
	<author>geoff\_syndicate</author>
	<datestamp>1268164440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I've been saying for ages is that the biggest problems for the open data movement are mostly found inside Government agencies.  Until the open data promoters can establish a cohesive pitch, based around solving goals for the agency in question, then these technical solutions are a waste of time.  Nat's latest 'open source' model for open data will only excite those already sold on the idea.</p><p>Most of the people who need convincing as to why they should get on board the open data train, need to be sold on the benefits to *them*, not the benefits to the technical community.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I 've been saying for ages is that the biggest problems for the open data movement are mostly found inside Government agencies .
Until the open data promoters can establish a cohesive pitch , based around solving goals for the agency in question , then these technical solutions are a waste of time .
Nat 's latest 'open source ' model for open data will only excite those already sold on the idea.Most of the people who need convincing as to why they should get on board the open data train , need to be sold on the benefits to * them * , not the benefits to the technical community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I've been saying for ages is that the biggest problems for the open data movement are mostly found inside Government agencies.
Until the open data promoters can establish a cohesive pitch, based around solving goals for the agency in question, then these technical solutions are a waste of time.
Nat's latest 'open source' model for open data will only excite those already sold on the idea.Most of the people who need convincing as to why they should get on board the open data train, need to be sold on the benefits to *them*, not the benefits to the technical community.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416562</id>
	<title>Standards by Domain needed.</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1268161380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>High-level: Save your differences from day to day, bittorrent those differences to others, merge back in differences from others.  Low-level: OMG, we used different table-names.</htmltext>
<tokenext>High-level : Save your differences from day to day , bittorrent those differences to others , merge back in differences from others .
Low-level : OMG , we used different table-names .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>High-level: Save your differences from day to day, bittorrent those differences to others, merge back in differences from others.
Low-level: OMG, we used different table-names.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417928</id>
	<title>Re:Open Street Map</title>
	<author>AxeTheMax</author>
	<datestamp>1268167620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Openstreetmap is good and useful if you don't want to fork out money. But it suffers from some vandalism, and some bad data. It needs more quality control if I'm going to depend on it in a remote location or when a life may be at stake. It will probably get more QC and then end up with some of the negative points that Wikipedia has.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Openstreetmap is good and useful if you do n't want to fork out money .
But it suffers from some vandalism , and some bad data .
It needs more quality control if I 'm going to depend on it in a remote location or when a life may be at stake .
It will probably get more QC and then end up with some of the negative points that Wikipedia has .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Openstreetmap is good and useful if you don't want to fork out money.
But it suffers from some vandalism, and some bad data.
It needs more quality control if I'm going to depend on it in a remote location or when a life may be at stake.
It will probably get more QC and then end up with some of the negative points that Wikipedia has.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31424386</id>
	<title>Usenet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268220060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Collaboration, archiving, openness, trolls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Collaboration , archiving , openness , trolls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Collaboration, archiving, openness, trolls.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417532</id>
	<title>Open data = published data</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268165760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is already an extensive system in place for reviewing and communicating "open" data--peer reviewed publication.  If you want to ensure that your data, analysis, and conclusions are part of the collective memory, then publish it in plain language (probably English).  "If it isn't published, you didn't do it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is already an extensive system in place for reviewing and communicating " open " data--peer reviewed publication .
If you want to ensure that your data , analysis , and conclusions are part of the collective memory , then publish it in plain language ( probably English ) .
" If it is n't published , you did n't do it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is already an extensive system in place for reviewing and communicating "open" data--peer reviewed publication.
If you want to ensure that your data, analysis, and conclusions are part of the collective memory, then publish it in plain language (probably English).
"If it isn't published, you didn't do it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31419986</id>
	<title>Interesting view:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268133180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Open source encourages laziness (because there are 1mil others out there who can fix it later/better, so good enuf is enuf for now), it can get<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/interesting/ bugs fixed or at least identified much faster (many eyes), it promotes collaboration<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/in a clique, outside of which you just get told to 'fix it yourself'/, and it's a terrible training ground for skills development as there is just code, no doco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Open source encourages laziness ( because there are 1mil others out there who can fix it later/better , so good enuf is enuf for now ) , it can get /interesting/ bugs fixed or at least identified much faster ( many eyes ) , it promotes collaboration /in a clique , outside of which you just get told to 'fix it yourself'/ , and it 's a terrible training ground for skills development as there is just code , no doco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Open source encourages laziness (because there are 1mil others out there who can fix it later/better, so good enuf is enuf for now), it can get /interesting/ bugs fixed or at least identified much faster (many eyes), it promotes collaboration /in a clique, outside of which you just get told to 'fix it yourself'/, and it's a terrible training ground for skills development as there is just code, no doco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31418632</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1268127180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And a huge success.<br>
Face it : the problem you mention exist today but are hidden to the public's eye. Giving the public a way to correct it is what wikipedia did and proved as workable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And a huge success .
Face it : the problem you mention exist today but are hidden to the public 's eye .
Giving the public a way to correct it is what wikipedia did and proved as workable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And a huge success.
Face it : the problem you mention exist today but are hidden to the public's eye.
Giving the public a way to correct it is what wikipedia did and proved as workable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31439786</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1268330100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <strong>Wikipedia.</strong> With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
You misspelled slashdot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wikipedia .
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who do n't know what they 're talking about ; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they 're , well , bored ; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted ; and so on .
You misspelled slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Wikipedia.
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.
You misspelled slashdot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31426334</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268237400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Open software is less beset by the "Dim-Bulb Twit problem" than Wikipedia because the cost of entry is higher - you have to be able to code (usually in something more demanding than BASIC.)  It's not clear that this (imperfect) filter would apply to open data. (E.g., would requiring raw SQL help filter DBTs?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Open software is less beset by the " Dim-Bulb Twit problem " than Wikipedia because the cost of entry is higher - you have to be able to code ( usually in something more demanding than BASIC .
) It 's not clear that this ( imperfect ) filter would apply to open data .
( E.g. , would requiring raw SQL help filter DBTs ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Open software is less beset by the "Dim-Bulb Twit problem" than Wikipedia because the cost of entry is higher - you have to be able to code (usually in something more demanding than BASIC.
)  It's not clear that this (imperfect) filter would apply to open data.
(E.g., would requiring raw SQL help filter DBTs?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417740</id>
	<title>Sharing via BitTorrents</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268166720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the biggest problems is that these datasets are often very large, causing bottlenecks with downloading the data as well as sharing results or  variations of the data.<br>I noticed that <a href="http://www.biotorrents.net/" title="biotorrents.net" rel="nofollow">BioTorrents</a> [biotorrents.net] is a new open source BitTorrent tracker aimed especially at sharing legal open access datasets and software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the biggest problems is that these datasets are often very large , causing bottlenecks with downloading the data as well as sharing results or variations of the data.I noticed that BioTorrents [ biotorrents.net ] is a new open source BitTorrent tracker aimed especially at sharing legal open access datasets and software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the biggest problems is that these datasets are often very large, causing bottlenecks with downloading the data as well as sharing results or  variations of the data.I noticed that BioTorrents [biotorrents.net] is a new open source BitTorrent tracker aimed especially at sharing legal open access datasets and software.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</id>
	<title>Already being done</title>
	<author>kiwimate</author>
	<datestamp>1268160180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?</p></div><p>Wikipedia. With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ? Wikipedia .
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who do n't know what they 're talking about ; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they 're , well , bored ; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted ; and so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?Wikipedia.
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416166</id>
	<title>Well...</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1268159700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The organizational challenges are likely a nasty morass of situation specific oddities, special cases, and unexpectedly tricky personal politics; but OSS technology has clear application.<br> <br>

Most of the large and notable OSS programs are substantially sized codebases distributed and developed across hundreds of different locations. If only by sheer necessity, OSS revision control tools are up to the challenge. That won't change the fact that gathering good data about the real world is hard; but it will make managing a big dataset with a whole bunch of contributors and keeping everything in sync a whole lot easier. Any of the contemporary(ie. post-CVS distributed) revision control systems could do that easily enough. Plus, you get something resembling chain of provenance(at least once the data enter the system) and the ability to filter out comitts from people who you think are unreliable.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The organizational challenges are likely a nasty morass of situation specific oddities , special cases , and unexpectedly tricky personal politics ; but OSS technology has clear application .
Most of the large and notable OSS programs are substantially sized codebases distributed and developed across hundreds of different locations .
If only by sheer necessity , OSS revision control tools are up to the challenge .
That wo n't change the fact that gathering good data about the real world is hard ; but it will make managing a big dataset with a whole bunch of contributors and keeping everything in sync a whole lot easier .
Any of the contemporary ( ie .
post-CVS distributed ) revision control systems could do that easily enough .
Plus , you get something resembling chain of provenance ( at least once the data enter the system ) and the ability to filter out comitts from people who you think are unreliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The organizational challenges are likely a nasty morass of situation specific oddities, special cases, and unexpectedly tricky personal politics; but OSS technology has clear application.
Most of the large and notable OSS programs are substantially sized codebases distributed and developed across hundreds of different locations.
If only by sheer necessity, OSS revision control tools are up to the challenge.
That won't change the fact that gathering good data about the real world is hard; but it will make managing a big dataset with a whole bunch of contributors and keeping everything in sync a whole lot easier.
Any of the contemporary(ie.
post-CVS distributed) revision control systems could do that easily enough.
Plus, you get something resembling chain of provenance(at least once the data enter the system) and the ability to filter out comitts from people who you think are unreliable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416332</id>
	<title>Use Open Standards</title>
	<author>The-Pheon</author>
	<datestamp>1268160360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People could start by documenting their data in standardized formats, like <a href="http://www.ddi-alliance.org/" title="ddi-alliance.org">DDI 3</a> [ddi-alliance.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People could start by documenting their data in standardized formats , like DDI 3 [ ddi-alliance.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People could start by documenting their data in standardized formats, like DDI 3 [ddi-alliance.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417876</id>
	<title>What would this look like?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268167320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it were open source data, after a while would it have more eye-candy and little added functionality and the mail list would be flooded with flame wars over meaningless minutia? Or not?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it were open source data , after a while would it have more eye-candy and little added functionality and the mail list would be flooded with flame wars over meaningless minutia ?
Or not ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it were open source data, after a while would it have more eye-candy and little added functionality and the mail list would be flooded with flame wars over meaningless minutia?
Or not?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416490</id>
	<title>Open data needs open data structure and owner</title>
	<author>bokmann</author>
	<datestamp>1268160960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting problem.  Several things come to mind:</p><p>1) The Pragmatic tip "Keep knowledge in Plain Text" (fro the Pragmatic Programmer book, that also brought us DRY).  You can argue whether XML, JSON, etc are considered 'plain text', but the spirit is simple - data is open when it is usable.</p><p>2) tools like diff and patch.  If you make a change, you need to be able to extract that change from the whole and give it to other people.</p><p>3) Version control tools to manage the complexity of forking, branching, merging, and otherwise dealing with all the many little 'diffs' people will create.  Git is an awesoe decentralized tool for this.</p><p>4) Open databases.  Not just SQL databases like Postgres and MySQL, but other database types for other data structures like CouchDB, Mulgara, etc.</p><p>All of these things come with the poer to help address this problem, but come with a barrier to entry in that their use requires skill not just in the tool, but in the problem space of 'data management'.</p><p>The problem of data management, as well as the job to point to one set as 'canonical' should be in the hands of someone capable of doing the work.  PErhaps there is a skillset worth defining here - some offshoot of library sciences?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting problem .
Several things come to mind : 1 ) The Pragmatic tip " Keep knowledge in Plain Text " ( fro the Pragmatic Programmer book , that also brought us DRY ) .
You can argue whether XML , JSON , etc are considered 'plain text ' , but the spirit is simple - data is open when it is usable.2 ) tools like diff and patch .
If you make a change , you need to be able to extract that change from the whole and give it to other people.3 ) Version control tools to manage the complexity of forking , branching , merging , and otherwise dealing with all the many little 'diffs ' people will create .
Git is an awesoe decentralized tool for this.4 ) Open databases .
Not just SQL databases like Postgres and MySQL , but other database types for other data structures like CouchDB , Mulgara , etc.All of these things come with the poer to help address this problem , but come with a barrier to entry in that their use requires skill not just in the tool , but in the problem space of 'data management'.The problem of data management , as well as the job to point to one set as 'canonical ' should be in the hands of someone capable of doing the work .
PErhaps there is a skillset worth defining here - some offshoot of library sciences ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting problem.
Several things come to mind:1) The Pragmatic tip "Keep knowledge in Plain Text" (fro the Pragmatic Programmer book, that also brought us DRY).
You can argue whether XML, JSON, etc are considered 'plain text', but the spirit is simple - data is open when it is usable.2) tools like diff and patch.
If you make a change, you need to be able to extract that change from the whole and give it to other people.3) Version control tools to manage the complexity of forking, branching, merging, and otherwise dealing with all the many little 'diffs' people will create.
Git is an awesoe decentralized tool for this.4) Open databases.
Not just SQL databases like Postgres and MySQL, but other database types for other data structures like CouchDB, Mulgara, etc.All of these things come with the poer to help address this problem, but come with a barrier to entry in that their use requires skill not just in the tool, but in the problem space of 'data management'.The problem of data management, as well as the job to point to one set as 'canonical' should be in the hands of someone capable of doing the work.
PErhaps there is a skillset worth defining here - some offshoot of library sciences?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417136</id>
	<title>Open Source Data</title>
	<author>Registered Coward v2</author>
	<datestamp>1268164080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?'"</p></div><p>Every time someone asked about the date, they'd get a reply of RTFM</p><p>Whenever someone did like the data they'd fork it with their own approved data</p><p>MS would issue a white paper saying why closed source data is better and cheaper</p><p>Everytime someone announced some new data, RMS would yell "That's GNU!!!!!&gt; </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ?
' " Every time someone asked about the date , they 'd get a reply of RTFMWhenever someone did like the data they 'd fork it with their own approved dataMS would issue a white paper saying why closed source data is better and cheaperEverytime someone announced some new data , RMS would yell " That 's GNU ! ! ! !
! &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?
'"Every time someone asked about the date, they'd get a reply of RTFMWhenever someone did like the data they'd fork it with their own approved dataMS would issue a white paper saying why closed source data is better and cheaperEverytime someone announced some new data, RMS would yell "That's GNU!!!!
!&gt; 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31422146</id>
	<title>OT: What's up with that "Open Source" logo?</title>
	<author>Ellis D. Tripp</author>
	<datestamp>1268146980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where did it come from, and what is it supposed to represent?</p><p>It's probably just cause I'm an electronics geek with a fondness for "hollow state", but that thing sure looks like the business end of a "magic eye tube" to me.</p><p>For those who have no idea what a magic eye tube is:</p><p><a href="http://www.magiceyetubes.com/eye02.jpg" title="magiceyetubes.com">http://www.magiceyetubes.com/eye02.jpg</a> [magiceyetubes.com]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic\_eye\_tube" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic\_eye\_tube</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where did it come from , and what is it supposed to represent ? It 's probably just cause I 'm an electronics geek with a fondness for " hollow state " , but that thing sure looks like the business end of a " magic eye tube " to me.For those who have no idea what a magic eye tube is : http : //www.magiceyetubes.com/eye02.jpg [ magiceyetubes.com ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic \ _eye \ _tube [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where did it come from, and what is it supposed to represent?It's probably just cause I'm an electronics geek with a fondness for "hollow state", but that thing sure looks like the business end of a "magic eye tube" to me.For those who have no idea what a magic eye tube is:http://www.magiceyetubes.com/eye02.jpg [magiceyetubes.com]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic\_eye\_tube [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31419106</id>
	<title>Linked Data?</title>
	<author>aharth</author>
	<datestamp>1268129160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Semantic Web technologies (in particular RDF, a graph-structured data format) are ideally suited for publishing data.  Also, these technologies facilitate the integration of separate pieces of information; integration is what you want to do if thousands of people start publishing structured data.

<a href="http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">Linked Data</a> [w3.org] (RDF using HTTP URIs to identify things) is already used by the NYT and the UK government to publish data online.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Semantic Web technologies ( in particular RDF , a graph-structured data format ) are ideally suited for publishing data .
Also , these technologies facilitate the integration of separate pieces of information ; integration is what you want to do if thousands of people start publishing structured data .
Linked Data [ w3.org ] ( RDF using HTTP URIs to identify things ) is already used by the NYT and the UK government to publish data online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Semantic Web technologies (in particular RDF, a graph-structured data format) are ideally suited for publishing data.
Also, these technologies facilitate the integration of separate pieces of information; integration is what you want to do if thousands of people start publishing structured data.
Linked Data [w3.org] (RDF using HTTP URIs to identify things) is already used by the NYT and the UK government to publish data online.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420400</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>Hal\_Porter</author>
	<datestamp>1268134860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>[Citation needed]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>[ Citation needed ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[Citation needed]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416598</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268161620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I concur.  Open source (depending on size) is not always great either.  There are how many Linux kernels running around and off shoots to the projects?  Now imagine that scenario with data.  Well this dataset is great for this one specific purpose, but can't be tied back to this other dataset over here even though I need information from it.  So I'll create a third dataset which combines the first two...  Enough people don't know what they are talking about (any financial analyst when talking industry specific for example), I just don't know how trustworthy the data would ultimately be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I concur .
Open source ( depending on size ) is not always great either .
There are how many Linux kernels running around and off shoots to the projects ?
Now imagine that scenario with data .
Well this dataset is great for this one specific purpose , but ca n't be tied back to this other dataset over here even though I need information from it .
So I 'll create a third dataset which combines the first two... Enough people do n't know what they are talking about ( any financial analyst when talking industry specific for example ) , I just do n't know how trustworthy the data would ultimately be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I concur.
Open source (depending on size) is not always great either.
There are how many Linux kernels running around and off shoots to the projects?
Now imagine that scenario with data.
Well this dataset is great for this one specific purpose, but can't be tied back to this other dataset over here even though I need information from it.
So I'll create a third dataset which combines the first two...  Enough people don't know what they are talking about (any financial analyst when talking industry specific for example), I just don't know how trustworthy the data would ultimately be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416424</id>
	<title>Madagascar</title>
	<author>toastar</author>
	<datestamp>1268160600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Any one here use Madagascar?</p><p><a href="http://www.reproducibility.org/" title="reproducibility.org">http://www.reproducibility.org/</a> [reproducibility.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Any one here use Madagascar ? http : //www.reproducibility.org/ [ reproducibility.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any one here use Madagascar?http://www.reproducibility.org/ [reproducibility.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416260</id>
	<title>Open Street Map</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268160000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I perfect example of collaboration with a massive dataset:</p><p>http://www.openstreetmap.org/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I perfect example of collaboration with a massive dataset : http : //www.openstreetmap.org/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I perfect example of collaboration with a massive dataset:http://www.openstreetmap.org/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416228</id>
	<title>Re:eclipse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268159880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who modded him offtopic?<br>Eclipse has an open source Data Tools <a href="http://www.eclipse.org/datatools/" title="eclipse.org">Platform</a> [eclipse.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who modded him offtopic ? Eclipse has an open source Data Tools Platform [ eclipse.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who modded him offtopic?Eclipse has an open source Data Tools Platform [eclipse.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416114</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420918</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1268137620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?</p></div><p>Wikipedia. With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.</p></div><p>So, basically just like any other large-scale, cooperative human enterprise, with the sole distinction that everyone gets to see the sausage being made (and to make it, if they choose)?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ? Wikipedia .
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who do n't know what they 're talking about ; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they 're , well , bored ; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted ; and so on.So , basically just like any other large-scale , cooperative human enterprise , with the sole distinction that everyone gets to see the sausage being made ( and to make it , if they choose ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?Wikipedia.
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.So, basically just like any other large-scale, cooperative human enterprise, with the sole distinction that everyone gets to see the sausage being made (and to make it, if they choose)?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31423442</id>
	<title>Re:eclipse?</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1268162040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Eclipse has an open source Data Tools Platform</p></div><p>For an extremely laid-back Zen-like stream-of-consciousness definition of "has".  My stream of consciousness experience trying to grok this thing was extremely irritating.</p><p>From <a href="http://www.eclipse.org/datatools/" title="eclipse.org">Eclipse Data Tools Platform (DTP) Project</a> [eclipse.org] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>"Data Tools" is a vast domain, yet there are a fairly small number of foundational requirements when developing with or managing data-centric systems. <i>(What does it do?)</i> A developer is interested in an environment that is easy to configure <i>(what does it do?)</i>, one in which the challenges of application development are due to the problem domain <i>(what does it do?)</i>, not the complexity of the tools employed. <i>(What does it do?)</i> Data management, whether by a developer working on an application <i>(what does it do?)</i>, or an administrator maintaining or monitoring a production system <i>(what does it do?)</i>, should also provide a consistent <i>(what does it do?)</i>, highly usable environment that works well with associated technologies. <i>(What does it do?)</i></p> </div><p>Three rules plucked from <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/feb/20/ten-rules-for-writing-fiction-part-one" title="guardian.co.uk">Ten rules for writing fiction</a> [guardian.co.uk] by Elmore Leonard</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Never open a book with weather. If it's only to create atmosphere, and not a character's reaction to the weather, you don't want to go on too long. <b>The</b> reader^H^H^H^H^H^H<b>geek is apt to leaf ahead looking for</b> people^H^H^H^H^H^H<b>purpose.</b></p><p><b>Don't go into great detail describing places and things</b> <i>(or meta framework)</i>, unless you're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language. You don't want descriptions that bring the action, the flow of the story, to a standstill.</p><p><b>Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.</b> Think of what you skip reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them.</p></div><p>I generally get along well with Eclipse, but for the love of God:</p><p><b>What <i>does</i> DTP do?</b></p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eclipse has an open source Data Tools PlatformFor an extremely laid-back Zen-like stream-of-consciousness definition of " has " .
My stream of consciousness experience trying to grok this thing was extremely irritating.From Eclipse Data Tools Platform ( DTP ) Project [ eclipse.org ] " Data Tools " is a vast domain , yet there are a fairly small number of foundational requirements when developing with or managing data-centric systems .
( What does it do ?
) A developer is interested in an environment that is easy to configure ( what does it do ?
) , one in which the challenges of application development are due to the problem domain ( what does it do ?
) , not the complexity of the tools employed .
( What does it do ?
) Data management , whether by a developer working on an application ( what does it do ?
) , or an administrator maintaining or monitoring a production system ( what does it do ?
) , should also provide a consistent ( what does it do ?
) , highly usable environment that works well with associated technologies .
( What does it do ?
) Three rules plucked from Ten rules for writing fiction [ guardian.co.uk ] by Elmore LeonardNever open a book with weather .
If it 's only to create atmosphere , and not a character 's reaction to the weather , you do n't want to go on too long .
The reader ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ Hgeek is apt to leaf ahead looking for people ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ H ^ Hpurpose.Do n't go into great detail describing places and things ( or meta framework ) , unless you 're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language .
You do n't want descriptions that bring the action , the flow of the story , to a standstill.Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip .
Think of what you skip reading a novel : thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them.I generally get along well with Eclipse , but for the love of God : What does DTP do ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eclipse has an open source Data Tools PlatformFor an extremely laid-back Zen-like stream-of-consciousness definition of "has".
My stream of consciousness experience trying to grok this thing was extremely irritating.From Eclipse Data Tools Platform (DTP) Project [eclipse.org] "Data Tools" is a vast domain, yet there are a fairly small number of foundational requirements when developing with or managing data-centric systems.
(What does it do?
) A developer is interested in an environment that is easy to configure (what does it do?
), one in which the challenges of application development are due to the problem domain (what does it do?
), not the complexity of the tools employed.
(What does it do?
) Data management, whether by a developer working on an application (what does it do?
), or an administrator maintaining or monitoring a production system (what does it do?
), should also provide a consistent (what does it do?
), highly usable environment that works well with associated technologies.
(What does it do?
) Three rules plucked from Ten rules for writing fiction [guardian.co.uk] by Elmore LeonardNever open a book with weather.
If it's only to create atmosphere, and not a character's reaction to the weather, you don't want to go on too long.
The reader^H^H^H^H^H^Hgeek is apt to leaf ahead looking for people^H^H^H^H^H^Hpurpose.Don't go into great detail describing places and things (or meta framework), unless you're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language.
You don't want descriptions that bring the action, the flow of the story, to a standstill.Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.
Think of what you skip reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them.I generally get along well with Eclipse, but for the love of God:What does DTP do?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417816</id>
	<title>sounds familiar</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268167020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't this what http://sciencecommons.org/ is all about: Freeing data to open up collaboration and revive the sexiness that science is!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't this what http : //sciencecommons.org/ is all about : Freeing data to open up collaboration and revive the sexiness that science is !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't this what http://sciencecommons.org/ is all about: Freeing data to open up collaboration and revive the sexiness that science is!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31419936</id>
	<title>Metadata handling with CKAN</title>
	<author>Bazman</author>
	<datestamp>1268132820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Looked at the CKAN software (www.ckan.net)? They run their own knowledge archive,a nd the software also powers the UK data.gov.uk site. RESTful API and python client.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looked at the CKAN software ( www.ckan.net ) ?
They run their own knowledge archive,a nd the software also powers the UK data.gov.uk site .
RESTful API and python client .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looked at the CKAN software (www.ckan.net)?
They run their own knowledge archive,a nd the software also powers the UK data.gov.uk site.
RESTful API and python client.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420790</id>
	<title>Lead by example</title>
	<author>konohitowa</author>
	<datestamp>1268136960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. could lead the way by providing an open database of their stories and comments (license changes would be needed with opt-out).</p><p>Then again, I might just think that because I'd rather have a different interface to the same info rather than the one I'm stuck with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps / .
could lead the way by providing an open database of their stories and comments ( license changes would be needed with opt-out ) .Then again , I might just think that because I 'd rather have a different interface to the same info rather than the one I 'm stuck with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps /.
could lead the way by providing an open database of their stories and comments (license changes would be needed with opt-out).Then again, I might just think that because I'd rather have a different interface to the same info rather than the one I'm stuck with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416114</id>
	<title>eclipse?</title>
	<author>toastar</author>
	<datestamp>1268159520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Eclipse not open source?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Eclipse not open source ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Eclipse not open source?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31421434</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>lennier</author>
	<datestamp>1268141100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I've said this a thousand times before: Make Wikipedia a P2P project without a single control, and build a cascading network of trust relationships on top of it (think CSS rules, but on articles instead of elements, and one CSS file per user, perhaps including those of others), and you solve all problems with then not-existing central authorities, and so also with censorship.</p></div><p>I agree wholeheartedly. If I understand correctly, this is very like what <a href="http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge313.html" title="edge.org">David Gelernter</a> [edge.org] is saying with his datasphere/lifestreams concept: a fully distributed system with no centre where any node can absorb and retransmit its own view of the data universe. Twitter and 'retweets' is a sort of lame, struggling, misbegotten attempt to shamble towards this idea.</p><p>What would happen, I think, is that such a distributed Wikipedia would converge on a few 'trusted super-editors' who produced their own authorised versions - like Linux kernel forks or distributions - since the pressure to join a 'good enough' peer group would force forking to only happen where necessary. And yes, there'd probably emerge separate political factions: a Mainstream Wikipedia, a Citizendium, a Conservapedia, an Encyclopedia Dramatica, a UFOpedia, a Treknopedia, each of which has their own idea of what subjects are/are not 'noteworthy' or which sources are well-attested... but that's fine, we have that already, what we'd win in a truly distributed system is not the ability the ability to <i>fork</i> (which the GPL already gives us) but the ability to easily <i>remerge</i> which is currently a real pain.</p><p>There's no reason, for instance, why Citizendium, TVTropes, Encyclopedia Dramatica, C2, MeatballWiki, etc all couldn't share the same technical base and content and link to and import/export from each other, and just provide different editorial policies or views. And I think we'd all win hugely if we could bring that about.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've said this a thousand times before : Make Wikipedia a P2P project without a single control , and build a cascading network of trust relationships on top of it ( think CSS rules , but on articles instead of elements , and one CSS file per user , perhaps including those of others ) , and you solve all problems with then not-existing central authorities , and so also with censorship.I agree wholeheartedly .
If I understand correctly , this is very like what David Gelernter [ edge.org ] is saying with his datasphere/lifestreams concept : a fully distributed system with no centre where any node can absorb and retransmit its own view of the data universe .
Twitter and 'retweets ' is a sort of lame , struggling , misbegotten attempt to shamble towards this idea.What would happen , I think , is that such a distributed Wikipedia would converge on a few 'trusted super-editors ' who produced their own authorised versions - like Linux kernel forks or distributions - since the pressure to join a 'good enough ' peer group would force forking to only happen where necessary .
And yes , there 'd probably emerge separate political factions : a Mainstream Wikipedia , a Citizendium , a Conservapedia , an Encyclopedia Dramatica , a UFOpedia , a Treknopedia , each of which has their own idea of what subjects are/are not 'noteworthy ' or which sources are well-attested... but that 's fine , we have that already , what we 'd win in a truly distributed system is not the ability the ability to fork ( which the GPL already gives us ) but the ability to easily remerge which is currently a real pain.There 's no reason , for instance , why Citizendium , TVTropes , Encyclopedia Dramatica , C2 , MeatballWiki , etc all could n't share the same technical base and content and link to and import/export from each other , and just provide different editorial policies or views .
And I think we 'd all win hugely if we could bring that about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've said this a thousand times before: Make Wikipedia a P2P project without a single control, and build a cascading network of trust relationships on top of it (think CSS rules, but on articles instead of elements, and one CSS file per user, perhaps including those of others), and you solve all problems with then not-existing central authorities, and so also with censorship.I agree wholeheartedly.
If I understand correctly, this is very like what David Gelernter [edge.org] is saying with his datasphere/lifestreams concept: a fully distributed system with no centre where any node can absorb and retransmit its own view of the data universe.
Twitter and 'retweets' is a sort of lame, struggling, misbegotten attempt to shamble towards this idea.What would happen, I think, is that such a distributed Wikipedia would converge on a few 'trusted super-editors' who produced their own authorised versions - like Linux kernel forks or distributions - since the pressure to join a 'good enough' peer group would force forking to only happen where necessary.
And yes, there'd probably emerge separate political factions: a Mainstream Wikipedia, a Citizendium, a Conservapedia, an Encyclopedia Dramatica, a UFOpedia, a Treknopedia, each of which has their own idea of what subjects are/are not 'noteworthy' or which sources are well-attested... but that's fine, we have that already, what we'd win in a truly distributed system is not the ability the ability to fork (which the GPL already gives us) but the ability to easily remerge which is currently a real pain.There's no reason, for instance, why Citizendium, TVTropes, Encyclopedia Dramatica, C2, MeatballWiki, etc all couldn't share the same technical base and content and link to and import/export from each other, and just provide different editorial policies or views.
And I think we'd all win hugely if we could bring that about.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417172</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420786</id>
	<title>One solution</title>
	<author>DCFusor</author>
	<datestamp>1268136960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is what we do on the fusor forum for amateur high energy scientists.  It's not perfect, but we basically share in the same manner as open source software all that we do, and it's working fine for us.  We help the newbies when we can, or tell them to search the extensive archives for when that question has been asked and answered before, post data, pictures of our gear and all that.  It's a good crowd, but a small site, so don't all go there at once....it won't take it and this isn't funded by some large outfit, it's just our own money.

Real names are universally used there -- this site is for real work, not kiddie flame wars.  There's not much moderation, but jerks lose the ability to log in quickly.

Here is the <a href="http://www.fusor.net/board/index.php?site=fusor" title="fusor.net" rel="nofollow"> open source fusor forum</a> [fusor.net] for you to check out.  This is mostly a bunch of old guys having some fun, and helping some new guys get into the game.  All sorts of advice and data shared openly and all in one place.  Far from perfect, but a good start, I'd say.  Check out the "recent threads" link which is as close to slashdot format as it gets on that site.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is what we do on the fusor forum for amateur high energy scientists .
It 's not perfect , but we basically share in the same manner as open source software all that we do , and it 's working fine for us .
We help the newbies when we can , or tell them to search the extensive archives for when that question has been asked and answered before , post data , pictures of our gear and all that .
It 's a good crowd , but a small site , so do n't all go there at once....it wo n't take it and this is n't funded by some large outfit , it 's just our own money .
Real names are universally used there -- this site is for real work , not kiddie flame wars .
There 's not much moderation , but jerks lose the ability to log in quickly .
Here is the open source fusor forum [ fusor.net ] for you to check out .
This is mostly a bunch of old guys having some fun , and helping some new guys get into the game .
All sorts of advice and data shared openly and all in one place .
Far from perfect , but a good start , I 'd say .
Check out the " recent threads " link which is as close to slashdot format as it gets on that site .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is what we do on the fusor forum for amateur high energy scientists.
It's not perfect, but we basically share in the same manner as open source software all that we do, and it's working fine for us.
We help the newbies when we can, or tell them to search the extensive archives for when that question has been asked and answered before, post data, pictures of our gear and all that.
It's a good crowd, but a small site, so don't all go there at once....it won't take it and this isn't funded by some large outfit, it's just our own money.
Real names are universally used there -- this site is for real work, not kiddie flame wars.
There's not much moderation, but jerks lose the ability to log in quickly.
Here is the  open source fusor forum [fusor.net] for you to check out.
This is mostly a bunch of old guys having some fun, and helping some new guys get into the game.
All sorts of advice and data shared openly and all in one place.
Far from perfect, but a good start, I'd say.
Check out the "recent threads" link which is as close to slashdot format as it gets on that site.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420580</id>
	<title>OpenDAP</title>
	<author>story645</author>
	<datestamp>1268135820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main point of the <a href="http://opendap.org/" title="opendap.org">openDAP</a> [opendap.org] project is to facilitate remote collaboration on data, and there are already a few organizations that use it to share data. I've used the python variant for NetCDF files and found it pretty happy and the web interface is clean. The best part of the OpenDAP project is probably that the data doesn't need to be downloaded/copied to be processed, which is really important for anyone who can't afford the racks of harddrives some of these datasets need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main point of the openDAP [ opendap.org ] project is to facilitate remote collaboration on data , and there are already a few organizations that use it to share data .
I 've used the python variant for NetCDF files and found it pretty happy and the web interface is clean .
The best part of the OpenDAP project is probably that the data does n't need to be downloaded/copied to be processed , which is really important for anyone who ca n't afford the racks of harddrives some of these datasets need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main point of the openDAP [opendap.org] project is to facilitate remote collaboration on data, and there are already a few organizations that use it to share data.
I've used the python variant for NetCDF files and found it pretty happy and the web interface is clean.
The best part of the OpenDAP project is probably that the data doesn't need to be downloaded/copied to be processed, which is really important for anyone who can't afford the racks of harddrives some of these datasets need.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416852</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268162820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?</p></div><p>Wikipedia. With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.</p></div><p>Right, because no-one ever edits wikipedia because some self-interested, self-proclaimed authority has written something erroneous ?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ? Wikipedia .
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who do n't know what they 're talking about ; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they 're , well , bored ; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted ; and so on.Right , because no-one ever edits wikipedia because some self-interested , self-proclaimed authority has written something erroneous ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?Wikipedia.
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.Right, because no-one ever edits wikipedia because some self-interested, self-proclaimed authority has written something erroneous ?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31421302</id>
	<title>Bad Start</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1268140320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They lost me when I read "Open source discourages laziness (because everyone can see the corners you've cut)".</p><p>Whoever said that hasn't seen a lot of open source <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical\_user\_interface" title="wikipedia.org">GUI's</a> [wikipedia.org] lately. Then they had the nerve to say open source products make bugs more likely to be identified because more people are looking at it. But how many of those people know what they're looking at? And is the core group, that knows what they're looking at, any bigger than some for-profit's programming team?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They lost me when I read " Open source discourages laziness ( because everyone can see the corners you 've cut ) " .Whoever said that has n't seen a lot of open source GUI 's [ wikipedia.org ] lately .
Then they had the nerve to say open source products make bugs more likely to be identified because more people are looking at it .
But how many of those people know what they 're looking at ?
And is the core group , that knows what they 're looking at , any bigger than some for-profit 's programming team ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They lost me when I read "Open source discourages laziness (because everyone can see the corners you've cut)".Whoever said that hasn't seen a lot of open source GUI's [wikipedia.org] lately.
Then they had the nerve to say open source products make bugs more likely to be identified because more people are looking at it.
But how many of those people know what they're looking at?
And is the core group, that knows what they're looking at, any bigger than some for-profit's programming team?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416654</id>
	<title>I agree in principle but dont believe it</title>
	<author>godrik</author>
	<datestamp>1268161920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just think it is not possible to build such useful data. I am working in parallel computing through a theoretical scheduling perspective.<br>Each single paper you see is interested in a slightly different model which needs slightly different parameters or have a look at slightly different metrics.</p><p>Despite I would love to have a database that provides the instances of all those guys as well as their implementations and results, I do not believe it is going to happen. Since every scientist need different parameters they will all end up with different databases. This will remove the interested of having such a database to begin with.</p><p>However, it is obvious to me that we want the data that were used to generated the results available so that reviewers can have a look at them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just think it is not possible to build such useful data .
I am working in parallel computing through a theoretical scheduling perspective.Each single paper you see is interested in a slightly different model which needs slightly different parameters or have a look at slightly different metrics.Despite I would love to have a database that provides the instances of all those guys as well as their implementations and results , I do not believe it is going to happen .
Since every scientist need different parameters they will all end up with different databases .
This will remove the interested of having such a database to begin with.However , it is obvious to me that we want the data that were used to generated the results available so that reviewers can have a look at them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just think it is not possible to build such useful data.
I am working in parallel computing through a theoretical scheduling perspective.Each single paper you see is interested in a slightly different model which needs slightly different parameters or have a look at slightly different metrics.Despite I would love to have a database that provides the instances of all those guys as well as their implementations and results, I do not believe it is going to happen.
Since every scientist need different parameters they will all end up with different databases.
This will remove the interested of having such a database to begin with.However, it is obvious to me that we want the data that were used to generated the results available so that reviewers can have a look at them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416224</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268159880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>it can get bugs fixed or at least identified much faster (many eyes),</b></p><p>So then why were there all those buffer overflow issues, null pointer issues in the Linux kernel before Coverity ran it's scan on the code?  Why did that Debian SSH bug exist for over 2 years if this is true?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it can get bugs fixed or at least identified much faster ( many eyes ) ,So then why were there all those buffer overflow issues , null pointer issues in the Linux kernel before Coverity ran it 's scan on the code ?
Why did that Debian SSH bug exist for over 2 years if this is true ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it can get bugs fixed or at least identified much faster (many eyes),So then why were there all those buffer overflow issues, null pointer issues in the Linux kernel before Coverity ran it's scan on the code?
Why did that Debian SSH bug exist for over 2 years if this is true?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417000</id>
	<title>There are lots of good examples of open data</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268163420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The NCBI has a lot of open data sets that they maintain and update regularly. My favorite is MEDLINE, a dataset of medical literature metadata (abstracts, titles, etc). Not quite open source, but available to researchers under a free (essentially) non-commercial attribution license.</p><p>There are good analogies between open source and open data. The key one is community participation. Large data sets will likely have problems and inconsistencies. These are going to be exposed by people using the data in odd and unexpected ways, so having a good mechanism for user feedback and improving the data is key, as is versioning and sane schema evolution.</p><p>There is  a nice series on open source government data in the freedom to tinker blog:<br>http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The NCBI has a lot of open data sets that they maintain and update regularly .
My favorite is MEDLINE , a dataset of medical literature metadata ( abstracts , titles , etc ) .
Not quite open source , but available to researchers under a free ( essentially ) non-commercial attribution license.There are good analogies between open source and open data .
The key one is community participation .
Large data sets will likely have problems and inconsistencies .
These are going to be exposed by people using the data in odd and unexpected ways , so having a good mechanism for user feedback and improving the data is key , as is versioning and sane schema evolution.There is a nice series on open source government data in the freedom to tinker blog : http : //www.freedom-to-tinker.com/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The NCBI has a lot of open data sets that they maintain and update regularly.
My favorite is MEDLINE, a dataset of medical literature metadata (abstracts, titles, etc).
Not quite open source, but available to researchers under a free (essentially) non-commercial attribution license.There are good analogies between open source and open data.
The key one is community participation.
Large data sets will likely have problems and inconsistencies.
These are going to be exposed by people using the data in odd and unexpected ways, so having a good mechanism for user feedback and improving the data is key, as is versioning and sane schema evolution.There is  a nice series on open source government data in the freedom to tinker blog:http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31422606</id>
	<title>Open society needs open data and analysis tools</title>
	<author>kiwigrant</author>
	<datestamp>1268151780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Investigative journalism is dying; citizens need direct access to government data and the tools to analyse it themselves.  We can't rely on the media to expose flaws in government policy any more so we need:

<ul>
<li>data</li><li>meta-data e.g. how to avoid obvious misinterpretations, errors etc</li><li>free tools for storing data (and running basic analyses) e.g. SQLite, MySQL, PostgreSQL etc</li><li>free tools for analysing data e.g. R, SOFA (Statistics Open For All - <a href="https://sourceforge.net/projects/sofastatistics/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">https://sourceforge.net/projects/sofastatistics/</a> [sourceforge.net]) etc</li><li>free resources for learning about analysis e.g. CAST (http://cast.massey.ac.nz/collection\_public.html), wikipedia etc</li><li>free tools for presenting and disseminating results e.g. OpenOffice Impress, WordPress etc</li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Investigative journalism is dying ; citizens need direct access to government data and the tools to analyse it themselves .
We ca n't rely on the media to expose flaws in government policy any more so we need : datameta-data e.g .
how to avoid obvious misinterpretations , errors etcfree tools for storing data ( and running basic analyses ) e.g .
SQLite , MySQL , PostgreSQL etcfree tools for analysing data e.g .
R , SOFA ( Statistics Open For All - https : //sourceforge.net/projects/sofastatistics/ [ sourceforge.net ] ) etcfree resources for learning about analysis e.g .
CAST ( http : //cast.massey.ac.nz/collection \ _public.html ) , wikipedia etcfree tools for presenting and disseminating results e.g .
OpenOffice Impress , WordPress etc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Investigative journalism is dying; citizens need direct access to government data and the tools to analyse it themselves.
We can't rely on the media to expose flaws in government policy any more so we need:


datameta-data e.g.
how to avoid obvious misinterpretations, errors etcfree tools for storing data (and running basic analyses) e.g.
SQLite, MySQL, PostgreSQL etcfree tools for analysing data e.g.
R, SOFA (Statistics Open For All - https://sourceforge.net/projects/sofastatistics/ [sourceforge.net]) etcfree resources for learning about analysis e.g.
CAST (http://cast.massey.ac.nz/collection\_public.html), wikipedia etcfree tools for presenting and disseminating results e.g.
OpenOffice Impress, WordPress etc</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417450</id>
	<title>Too difficult unless funding sources demand it.</title>
	<author>virtualXTC</author>
	<datestamp>1268165400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The real problem is the lack of a standardized language between different scientists / agencies.  It's really up to the funding sources (such as the NCI)  to come up with the standards else you end up with standards, that while technically better, that only a few follow, ie: chembank.broad.mit.edu.  Further, having mutiple "standards</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real problem is the lack of a standardized language between different scientists / agencies .
It 's really up to the funding sources ( such as the NCI ) to come up with the standards else you end up with standards , that while technically better , that only a few follow , ie : chembank.broad.mit.edu .
Further , having mutiple " standards</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real problem is the lack of a standardized language between different scientists / agencies.
It's really up to the funding sources (such as the NCI)  to come up with the standards else you end up with standards, that while technically better, that only a few follow, ie: chembank.broad.mit.edu.
Further, having mutiple "standards</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31418448</id>
	<title>Wikipedia == Anarchy != Open Source</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1268126460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?</p></div><p>Wikipedia. With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities</p></div><p>Who do not have <b>commit access</b>.</p><p>That is one of the keys to running an open source project well: you, being the giant with some source code, let everybody stand on your shoulders so they can see farther.  And you let others stand on <em>their</em> shoulders so they can see even farther still.</p><p>But you don't let just about anyone <em>become</em> part of your shoulders.  Especially not if that would weaken your shoulders (i.e. bad code or citation-free encyclopaedia entries).</p><p>That's the difference between Open Source projects and the Wikipedia project: Wikipedia lets the midgets stand on the shoulders of the giant, even if that makes the giant shorter rather than taller.  Well-run open source projects don't let that happen.  And poorly run open source projects don't exist due to survivor bias<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ? Wikipedia .
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authoritiesWho do not have commit access.That is one of the keys to running an open source project well : you , being the giant with some source code , let everybody stand on your shoulders so they can see farther .
And you let others stand on their shoulders so they can see even farther still.But you do n't let just about anyone become part of your shoulders .
Especially not if that would weaken your shoulders ( i.e .
bad code or citation-free encyclopaedia entries ) .That 's the difference between Open Source projects and the Wikipedia project : Wikipedia lets the midgets stand on the shoulders of the giant , even if that makes the giant shorter rather than taller .
Well-run open source projects do n't let that happen .
And poorly run open source projects do n't exist due to survivor bias ; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?Wikipedia.
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authoritiesWho do not have commit access.That is one of the keys to running an open source project well: you, being the giant with some source code, let everybody stand on your shoulders so they can see farther.
And you let others stand on their shoulders so they can see even farther still.But you don't let just about anyone become part of your shoulders.
Especially not if that would weaken your shoulders (i.e.
bad code or citation-free encyclopaedia entries).That's the difference between Open Source projects and the Wikipedia project: Wikipedia lets the midgets stand on the shoulders of the giant, even if that makes the giant shorter rather than taller.
Well-run open source projects don't let that happen.
And poorly run open source projects don't exist due to survivor bias ;-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416734</id>
	<title>Re:Already being done</title>
	<author>musicalmicah</author>
	<datestamp>1268162340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project? What would this look like?</p></div><p>Wikipedia. With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.</p></div><p>Gee, you make it sound so terrible when you put it like that. It also happens to be an amazing source of information and the perfect resource for an initial foray into any research topic. It's a shining example of what happens when huge amounts of people want to share their knowledge and time with the world. Sure, it's got a few flaws, but in the grand scheme of things, it has made a massive body of information ever more accessible and usable.</p><p>Moreover, I've seen all the flaws you've listed in closed collaborative projects as well. Like all projects, Wikipedia is both a beneficiary and a victim of human nature.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project ?
What would this look like ? Wikipedia .
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who do n't know what they 're talking about ; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they 're , well , bored ; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted ; and so on.Gee , you make it sound so terrible when you put it like that .
It also happens to be an amazing source of information and the perfect resource for an initial foray into any research topic .
It 's a shining example of what happens when huge amounts of people want to share their knowledge and time with the world .
Sure , it 's got a few flaws , but in the grand scheme of things , it has made a massive body of information ever more accessible and usable.Moreover , I 've seen all the flaws you 've listed in closed collaborative projects as well .
Like all projects , Wikipedia is both a beneficiary and a victim of human nature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if we ran an open data project like an open source project?
What would this look like?Wikipedia.
With all the inherent problems of self-proclaimed authorities who don't know what they're talking about; bored trouble-makers who inject bad information because they're, well, bored; petty little squabbles which result in valid data being deleted; and so on.Gee, you make it sound so terrible when you put it like that.
It also happens to be an amazing source of information and the perfect resource for an initial foray into any research topic.
It's a shining example of what happens when huge amounts of people want to share their knowledge and time with the world.
Sure, it's got a few flaws, but in the grand scheme of things, it has made a massive body of information ever more accessible and usable.Moreover, I've seen all the flaws you've listed in closed collaborative projects as well.
Like all projects, Wikipedia is both a beneficiary and a victim of human nature.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31421434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416852
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416734
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31423442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416114
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31418632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420400
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31439786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31426334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31418448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_1622200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31419106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417928
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416490
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31419106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416332
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416114
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31423442
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31418448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31426334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31418632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31420400
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31417172
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31421434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31439786
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_1622200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_1622200.31416562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
