Cut to the chase http://www.ideaspace.net/users/wkearney/archives/entries/000407.html Marc Canter picks up on the point. It's about cutting through the misdirections and misunderstandings. Some of this stuff is... wkearney 2003-07-26T14:28:39-05:00 http://www.ideaspace.net/users/wkearney/archives/entries/000407.html en-us Ideaspace 1 Marc Canter picks up on the point. It's about cutting through the misdirections and misunderstandings. Some of this stuff is... 2003-07-26T14:28:39-05:00 Marc Canter picks up on the point. It's about cutting through the misdirections and misunderstandings. Some of this stuff is complicated and it's easy to think that means there's something wrong with it. There are, of course, plenty of things that grow in complexity well beyond what's needed. But I try to approach some of this stuff using a turn on the old 'spilled milk' analogy. My take is "you spill the milk to see just how big the table is". As in, let's not whine about what might happen to that expensive rug if the milk spilled on it. Let's actually see how much we can spill. Let's see how wide the range of complexities might become if we took them to their logical extremes. For some folks this it tremendously difficult because it involves risk and fear of the unknown. Or, more pointedly, fear of them being found out for not knowing something. How quaint. Let's not bother to research things because it might reveal we don't really have it all figured out. Analogies of ostriches and sand seem applicable here...

What Marc also did was present a link to the k-collector. Heh, some of my posts really do take a rather biting position, don't they?

There's a real sense of looming serendipity lurking out there, just out of sight in the mist. It's both a mist of the past and the future. A lot of this stuff has been covered before. Yet, a lot remains to be considered. As different efforts take the chance to 'spill the milk' I think we're going to see some really cool stuff get discovered.

Do the semantic web folks have it all figured out? Not entirely. Do the oversimplification fanatics have it figured out? Most definitely not. But I think as the two camps pull their heads up from the depths and look at what the others are doing there's a chance a new middle ground can be found.

Maybe it's as easy as suggesting: simple folk, look ahead and wonder why. And advanced folk, look back and find out why they're not following.

Or are we going to have to wait for some proprietary "we can do it all without you" approach?

]]> Marc Canter picks up on the point. It's about cutting through the misdirections and misunderstandings. Some of this stuff is... 407 406 408