Searching for directory sites: Google falls for Yahoo!

i’m just going to pretend for now that this is all just some sort of mathematical fluke:

“Last November, as reported in Google likes directory sites, I discovered that Google had the uncanny ability to sniff out high-quality, but little-known directory sites. As I discussed in that article, Google was able to do this because it ranks sites according to how many people make links to them, and smart people everywhere learn that directories are important, so they make many links to them. Now, however, I’ve found solid evidence that Google’s new alliances, especially the pact with Yahoo! that was announced in June, seem to have compromised its ability to find directories.”

i don’t know why xml-based protocols have been capturing my eye so much lately. if i get any free time at all, maybe i’ll munge around xmethods and see if there is anything of interest:

“Standards like XML and SOAP make it easier for systems to make remote procedure calls across the Internet. For example, corporate systems will allow customers to make calls that check real-time inventory levels. Your car’s navigation system will check local traffic reports when planning the quickest route. These are all “services”. This site helps you find services that are publicly accessible.”

crap. dark clouds are hanging over the nascent snowdeal.org media empire. taylor has removed me from his list of regularly visited sites. and what do i get replaced with? “frivolous gaming sites”. oh, that’s just great. actually this is my first experience with something that feels close to rejection and i don’t like it! taylor, please come back. i’ll be interesting. you’ll find stuff here that you won’t at those silly “frivolous gaming sites”. honest. sniff.

ooof. it’s a good thing i ordered the extra large annotated bookmark bin [and no smartypants, despite evidence to the contrary, this is not going to turn into ‘all rss all the time’]:

oreilly network rss moves forward
oreilly network writing rss 1.0
oreilly network rss delivers the xml promise
davenet what to do about rss?

click on image to view embedded rdf description

and in related news – ever wondered if you annotate your photos with rdf? well the w3c has a technical note on describing and retrieving photos using rdf and http:

This note describes a project for describing & retrieving (digitized) photos with (RDF) metadata. It describes the RDF schemas, a data-entry program for quickly entering metadata for large numbers of photos, a way to serve the photos and the metadata over HTTP, and some suggestions for search methods to retrieve photos based on their descriptions.

The data-entry program has been implemented in Java, a specific Jigsaw frame has been done to retrieve the RDF from the image through HTTP. The RDF schema uses the Dublin Core schema as well as additional schemas for technical data.

and they’ve even gone and produced a rdfpic to embed embed an rdf description of a picture into the picture itself. will wonders ever cease?


[ rdfpic link via whump]

well, that one person who regularly visits my site has probably already seen weblogs: a history and perspective, but i’ll post it anyway, because i’m just that crazy:

“The blogger, by virtue of simply writing down whatever is on his mind, will be confronted with his own thoughts and opinions. Blogging every day, he will become a more confident writer. A community of 100 or 20 or 3 people may spring up around the public record of his thoughts. Being met with friendly voices, he may gain more confidence in his view of the world; he may begin to experiment with longer forms of writing, to play with haiku, or to begin a creative project–one that he would have dismissed as being inconsequential or doubted he could complete only a few months before.

As he enunciates his opinions daily, this new awareness of his inner life may develop into a trust in his own perspective. His own reactions–to a poem, to other people, and, yes, to the media–will carry more weight with him. Accustomed to expressing his thoughts on his website, he will be able to more fully articulate his opinions to himself and others. He will become impatient with waiting to see what others think before he decides, and will begin to act in accordance with his inner voice instead. Ideally, he will become less reflexive and more reflective, and find his own opinions and ideas worthy of serious consideration.”

edd dumbill serves up a great overview of the role played by xml in the next-generation web, with a superb discussion on rdf and soap:

“In sum, SOAP provides a web-aware alternative to current object protocols like CORBA. It has a low cost of deployment and is supported by software right now. It still has issues to face in terms of interoperability, security, and description/discovery infrastructure.

RDF implements a computer-readable alternative to current web knowledge representation applications (i.e., HTML). It faces some immediate challenges in terms of intelligibility and immediate business uses are less than certain. In the long run, though, it presents the opportunity to transform the way the web is used.

Looking at the big picture, one can envisage SOAP and RDF operating in a complementary manner in the Web of the future. RDF-based technology can provide directory information to describe and locate SOAP services. SOAP could carry RDF graphs in between RDF aggregation services, or provide a “virtual graph” service from a provider like Amazon.com.

Both SOAP and RDF have a part to play in my dream of a totally integrated future. However, they also point to the need for some very significant work, only just getting started, on agreeing upon XML vocabularies and semantics. That is a hard problem, one which I expect will never be totally solved, and may cause us to develop the best “nearly-there” solutions we can, to continue getting the most out of the Web.”

edd’s last comment is, of course, the ‘devil’s in the details’ type of thing – but at least a few bright people are working towards the semantic web [ and here ]. you’re in big trouble if you miss what the semantic web isn’t:

“There are many other data models which RDF’s Directed Labelled Graph (DLG) model compares closely with, and maps onto. This page is written with the intention of enumerating the similarity and diferences between the models, to indicate how the mapping might be done and what extra information muast be added in the process. Where the other models are related to previous unmet promises of computer science, now passed into folk law as unsolvable problems, they suggest a fear that the goal of a Semantic Web is inappropriate.

One consistent difference between the Semantic Web and many data models for programming langauges is the “closed world assumption”.”

{ intertwingled since 2000 }