[Bibjson-dev] export from your couchdb

Fri Jun 24 20:31:07 UTC 2011

Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:56 PM, Jim Pitman <pitman at stat.berkeley.edu>wrote:
> > Do any of you know this crowd:
> > http://www.nbic.nl/about-nbic/affiliated-organisations/cwa/declaration/
> Yes I know lots of these people. Barend is also promoting thr idea of nanopublications.
Interesting. I about skeptical about nanopublications. But BibSoup is a bit in the same vein.

> My main reservation is that I don;t have the personal time to devote to this and I think they are heavily
> theoretical and possibly over engineered. They will be successful in getting
> grants to research this I think. The main output (in 3 years time) will be
> research papers and prototypes. I don't thave the time.

I completely agree. I came to the same conclusion after laboring for a year or two to create people.bibkn.org 
with RDF/BIBO/Virtuso/SPARQL/Drupal/...
VIVO sufffers from the same disease.
That architecture is way to heavy, and  I think Mark and I can achieve the same and much more in a week or two of
work with  CouchDB/JSON  as the data model and BibServer  as the display provider.

> We have a chance of sweeping the world with Open Bibliography in 1 year and ScHTML in 2. I would rather spend my time doing that.

Me too. I am totally on board with that program.

> PT and I saw this in action at Beyond the PDF - lots of talk. Meanwhile we have got ScHTML onto the runway

Great. See also http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jun/0058.html for a significant W3C post by the TAG.
This should be watched closely to guide good choices for ScHTML. May be best for ScHTML to wait and see how the microdata/RDFa fight
plays out before investing much more effort. In the meantime, we can use BibJSON for a very large fraction of the data  we care about.
BibJSON may stabilize more quickly than ScHTML because we can duck the microdata/RDFa fight, and
focus on making BibJSON a lingua franca for advanced biblio data processing and display.

> > Bit suspicious to see
> > Bruce Kiesel -- Thomson Reuters
> > there too.
> And strong Elsevier involvement

Right. The big corporations love to see this semweb stuff, because its heavy machinery, and there is no doubt they can exploit it
with their budgets. We are way better off with simpler, lighter low budget tools.  Lets be mammals and let the dinosaurs evolve as they
may.

--Jim