Kingsley Idehen's Blog Data Space

Web 2.0's Open Data Access Conundrum

Sat, 02 Sep 2006 16:47:52 GMT

Open Data Access and Web 2.0 have a very strange relationship that continues to blur the lines of demarcation between where Web 2.0 ends and where Web.Next (i.e Web 3.0, Semantic/Data Web, Web of Databases etc.) starts. But before I proceed, let me attempt to define Web 2.0 one more time:

A phase in the evolution web usage patterns that emphasizes Web Services based interaction between “Web Users” and “Points of Web Presence” over traditional “Web Users” and “Web Sites” based interaction. Basically, a transition from visual site interaction to presence based interaction.

BTW - Dare Obasanjo also commented about Web usage patterns in his post titled: The Two Webs. Where he concluded that we had a dichotomy along the lines of: HTTP-for-APIs (2.0) and HTTP-for-Browsers (1.0). Which Jon Udell evolved into: HTTP-Services-Web and HTTP-Intereactive-Web during our recent podcast conversation.

With definitions in place, I will resume my quest to unveil the aforementioned Web 2.0 Data Access Conundrum:

Emphasis on XML's prowess in the realms of Data and Protocol Modeling alongside Data Representation. Especially as SOAP or REST styles of Web Services and various XML formats (RSS 0.92/1.0/1.1/2.0, Atom, OPML, OCS etc.) collectively define the Web 2.0 infrastructure landscape
Where a modicum of Data Access appreciation and comprehension does exist it is inherently compromised by business models that mandate some form of “Walled Gardens” and “Data Silos”
Mash-ups are a response to said “Walled Gardens” and “Data Silos” . Mash-ups by definition imply combining things that were not built for recombination.

As you can see from the above, Open Data access isn't genuinely compatible with Web 2.0.

We can also look at the same issue by way of the popular M-V-C (Model View Controller) pattern. Web 2.0 is all about the “V” and “C” with a modicum of “M” at best (data access, open data access, and flexible open data access are completely separate things). The “C” items represent application logic exposed by SOAP or REST style web services etc. I'll return to this later in this post.

What about Social Networking you must be thinking? Isn't this a Web 2.0 manifestation? Not at all (IMHO). The Web was developed / invented by Tim Berners-Lee to leverage the “Network Effects” potential of the Internet for connecting People and Data. Social Networking on the other hand, is simply one of several ways by which construct network connections. I am sure we all accept the fact that connections are built for many other reasons beyond social interaction. That said, we also know that through social interactions we actually develop some of our most valuable relationships (we are social creatures after-all).

The Web 2.0 Open Data Access impedance reality is ultimately going to be the greatest piece of tutorial and usecase material for the Semantic Web. I take this position because it is human nature to seek Freedom (in unadulterated form) which implies the following:

Access Data from a myriad of data sources (irrespective of structural differences at the database level)
Mesh (not Mash) data in new and interesting ways
Share the meshed data with as many relevant people as possible for social, professional, political, religious, and other reasons
Construct valuable networks based on data oriented connections

Web 2.0 by definition and use case scenarios is inherently incompatible with the above due to the lack of Flexible and Open Data Access.

If we take the definition of Web 2.0 (above) and rework it with an appreciation Flexible and Open Data Access you would arrive at something like this:

A phase in the evolution of the web that emphasizes interaction between “Web Users” and “Web Data” facilitated by Web Services based APIs and an Open & Flexible Data Access Model “.

In more succinct form:

A pervasive network of people connected by data or data connected by people.

Returning to M-V-C and looking at the definition above, you now have a complete of ”M“ which is enigmatic in Web 2.0 and the essence of the Semantic Web (Data and Context).

To make all of this possible a palatable Data Model is required. The model of choice is the Graph based RDF Data Model - not to be mistaken for the RDF/XML serialization which is just that, a data serialization that conforms to the aforementioned RDF data model.

The Enterprise Challenge

Web 2.0 cannot and will not make valuable inroads into the the enterprise because enterprises live and die by their ability to exploit data. Weblogs, Wikis, Shared Bookmarking Systems, and other Web 2.0 distributed collaborative applications profiles are only valuable if the data is available to the enterprise for meshing (not mashing).

A good example of how enterprises will exploit data by leveraging networks of people and data (social networks in this case) is shown in this nice presentation by Accenture's Institute for High Performance Business titled: Visualizing Organizational Change.

Web 2.0 commentators (for the most part) continue to ponder the use of Web 2.0 within the enterprise while forgetting the congruency between enterprise agility and exploitation of people & data networks (The very issue emphasized in this original Web vision document by Tim Berners-Lee). Even worse, they remain challenged or spooked by the Semantic Web vision because they do not understand that Web 2.0 is fundamentally a Semantic Web precursor due to Open Data Access challenges. Web 2.0 is one of the greatest demonstrations of why we need the Semantic Web at the current time.

Finally, juxtapose the items below and you may even get a clearer view of what I am an attempting to convey about the virtues of Open Data Access and the inflective role it plays as we move beyond Web 2.0:

Information Management Proposal - Tim Berners-Lee
Visualizing Organizational Change - Accenture Institute of High Performance Business

The WWW Proposal and RDF: Then and Now (circa 1999)

Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:20:00 GMT

I've just re-read an article penned by Dan Brickley in 1999 titled: The WWW Proposal and RDF: Then and Now, that retains its prescience to this very day. Ironically I stumbled across this timeless piece while revisiting the RSS name imbroglio that gave us a simple syndication format (RSS 2.0) that will ultimately implode (IMHO) since "Simple" is ultimately short lived when dealing with attention challenged end-users that are always assumed to be dumb when in fact they are simply ambivalent.

I was compelled to go back to the RSS 2.0 imbroglio when I came across Dave Winer's comments re. "the SEC attempting to reinvent RSS 2.0..." response to Jon Udell's recent XBRL article.

Although I don't believe in complex entry points into complex technology realms, I do subscribe to the approach where developers deal with the complexity associated with a problem domain while hiding said complexity from ambivalent end-users via coherent interfaces -- which does not always imply User Interface.

XBRL is a great piece of work that addresses the complex problem domain of Financial Reporting. The only thing it's missing right now is an Ontology that facilitates RDF Data Model based XBRL Schema and Instance Data which ultimately makes XBRL data available to RDF query languages such as SPARQL. This line of thought implies, for instance, an XML Schema to OWL Ontology Mapping for Schema Data (as explained in a white paper by the VSIS Group at the university of Hamburg) leaving the Instance Data to be generated in a myriad of ways that includes XML to RDF and/or XML->SQL->RDF.

As I stated in an earlier post: we should not mistake ambivalence to lack of intelligence. Assuming "Simple" is always right at all times is another way of subscribing to this profound misconception. You know, assuming the world was flat (as opposed to geoid) was quite palatable at some point in the history of mankind, I wonder what would have happened if we held on to this point of view to this day because of its "Simplicity"?

Value vs Source

Sat, 29 Jul 2006 22:19:22 GMT

(Via David Warlick.)

Value vs Source: "

I think we’re all sorta jumping around the same bush. It’s been a good dance because I’ve learned some things. First of all, nothing’s simple and it isn’t getting any simpler. There are no rules any more and as much as I’d like to come up with some kind of all encompassing unified field theory of ethical research method, I know that smarter people than me have already done a better job, and none of it is perfect.

Please allow me to do something kinda strange. I want to look backward for some clues. When I was young, my Dad loved to build things. He was the preeminent do-it-yourselfer. Every weekend, he had a building project, and every Saturday morning he loaded us boys into the station wagon and off we went to the Lowes Hardware Store in Shelby, where he bought the tools and materials he would need for the project.

He did not have a list of criterial for selecting his materials, because every project was different — the goal was different. If he had selected everything based on the same criteria, then everything he built would have been made with pine shelving, two-penny finishing nails, and all the work would have been done with a Craftsman common nail hammer. Instead, he selected his building materials and tools based on the goal of the project. To do otherwise would have resulted in a product that did not last long, and that would have been unethical.

Years later, I studied under the best teacher I ever had, Mr. Bill Edwards — my industrial arts teacher. His technique was to help us learn industrial arts skills by helping us to build something of value. I built a kayak. Other students built book shelves, stools, and chess boards. Two friends of mine built a life-size replica of a Gemini Space Capsule. Mr. Edwards taught us to set goals and to make decisions based on those goals.

This was the perfect way to teach industrial arts skills, since we were in the industrial age. If Edwards had taught us in the same way that my information arts teachers were teaching, he would have put a stack of lumber on our desks and asked us to practice driving nails. But he taught us by putting us in the industry. We should be teaching today by putting students in the industry of information. We need to stop teaching science and start teaching students to be scientists. Stop teaching history, but rather teach to be historians. Stop teaching students to be researchers, and instead, teach them to solve problems and accomplish goals using information.

I am certain that there were brands of wood and nails that my father wouldn’t buy, because he couldn’t depend on them. He swore by Craftsman tools. To build with materials that were unreliable would have been unethical. But his conscious work in finding and selecting materials was based on the goal at hand. All else pointed to that criteria.

It is critical to know and understand the source of the information. But what is it about the source that helps you accomplish your goal. It’s important to understand when the information was generated and published. But what is it about ‘when’ that helps you accomplish your goal. It’s important to understand what the information is made of, and what it is about its format and how you can use it that helps you accomplish your goal. It’s important to understand the information’s cultural, economic, environmental, and emotional context, and what it is about the context that helps you accomplish your goal. All aspects remain critical, but its problem solving and goal achieving that children need to be doing, not just hoop-jumping in their schools. The need to look for the information’s value as a tool for ethically accomplishing their goals.

Technorati Tags: librarians, warlick

Portions of this post come from Raw Materials for the Mind ISBN #1-4116-2795-4

"

RDF's History

Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:42:57 GMT

We are getting very close to a Semantic Web watershed moment (IMHO). Thus, for the purpose of historic record, I would like to create a public bookmark to Tim Bray's 2003 post titled: RDF.net Challenge that also contains a nice section about the History of RDF.

Note to Tim:

Is the RDF.net domain deal still on? I know it's past 1st Jan 2006, but do bear in mind that the critical issue of a broadly supported RDF Query Language only took significant shape approximately 13 months ago (in the form of SPARQL), and this is all so critical to the challenge you posed in 2003.

RDF.net could become a point of semantic-web-presence through which the benefits of SPARQL compliant Triple|Quad Stores, Shared Ontologies, and SPARQL Protocol are unveiled in their well intended glory :-).

Standards as social contracts

Tue, 04 Jul 2006 17:25:51 GMT

Standards as social contracts: "Looking at Dave Winer's efforts in evangelizing OPML, I try to draw some rough lines into what makes a de-facto standard. De Facto standards are made and seldom happen on their own. In this entry, I look back at the history of HTML, RSS, the open source movement and try to draw some lines as to what makes a standard.

"
(Via Tristan Louis.)

I posted a comment to the Tristan Louis' post along the following lines:

Analysis is spot on re. the link between de facto standardization and bootstrapping. Likewise, the clear linkage between boostrapping and connected communities (a variation of the social networking paradigm).

Dave built a community around a XML content syndication and subscription usecase demo that we know today as the blogosphere. Superficially, one may conclude that Semantic Web vision has suffered to date from a lack a similar bootstrap effort. Whereas in reality, we are dealing with "time and context" issues that are critical to the base understanding upon which a "Dave Winer" style bootstrap for the Semantic Web would occur.

Personally, I see the emergence of Web 2.0 (esp. the mashups phenomenon) as the "time and context" seeds from which the Semantic Web bootstrap will sprout. I see shared ontologies such as FOAF and SIOC leading the way (they are the RSS 2.0's of the Semantic Web IMHO).

My podcast conversation with Jon Udell

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:43:12 GMT

Jon and I had a recent chat yesterday that is now available in Podcast form.

"In my fourth Friday podcast we hear from Kingsley Idehen, CEO of OpenLink Software. I wrote about OpenLink's universal database and app server, Virtuoso, back in 2002 and 2003. Earlier this month Virtuoso became the first mature SQL/XML hybrid to make the transition to open source. The latest incarnation of the product also adds SPARQL (a semantic web query language) to its repertoire. ..."

(Via Jon's Radio.)

I would like to make an important clarification re. the GData Protocol and what is popularly dubbed as "Adam Bosworth's fingerprints." I do not believe in a one solution (a simple one for the sake of simplicity) to a deceptively complex problem. Virtuoso supports Atom 1.0 (syndication only at the current time) and Atom 0.3 (syndication and publication which have been in place for years).

BTW - the GData Protocol and Atom 1.0 publishing support will be delivered in both the Open Source and Commercial Edition updates to Virtuoso next week (very little work due to what's already in place).

I make the clarification above to eliminate the possibility of assuming mutual exclusivity of my perspective/vison and Adam's (Jon also makes this important point when he speaks about our opinions being on either side of a spectrum/continuum). I simply want to broaden the scope of this discussion. I am a profound believer in the Semantic Web / Data Web vision, and I predict that we will be querying the Googlebase via SPARQL in the not to distant future (this doesn't mean that netizens will be forced to master SPARQL, absolutely not! But there will be conduit technologies that deal with matter).

Side note: I actually last spoke with Adam at the NY Hilton in 2000 (the day I unveiled Virtuoso to the public for the first time, in person). We bumped into each other and I told him about Virtuoso (at the time the big emphasis was SQL to XML and the vocabulary we had chosen re. SQL extension...), and he told me about his departure from Microsoft and the commencement of his new venture (CrossGain prior to his stint at BEA), what struck me even more was his interest in Linux and Open Source (bearing in mind this was about 3 or so week after he departed Microsoft.)

If you are encountering Virtuoso for the first time via this post or Jon's, please make time to read the product history article on the Virtuoso Wiki (which is one of many Virtuoso based applications that make up our soon to be released OpenLink DataSpace offering).

That said, I better go listen to the podcast :-)

My podcast conversation with Jon Udell

Fri, 28 Apr 2006 14:43:12 GMT

Jon and I had a recent chat yesterday that is now available in Podcast form.

"In my fourth Friday podcast we hear from Kingsley Idehen, CEO of OpenLink Software. I wrote about OpenLink's universal database and app server, Virtuoso, back in 2002 and 2003. Earlier this month Virtuoso became the first mature SQL/XML hybrid to make the transition to open source. The latest incarnation of the product also adds SPARQL (a semantic web query language) to its repertoire. ..."

(Via Jon's Radio.)

BTW - the GData Protocol and Atom 1.0 publishing support will be delivered in both the Open Source and Commercial Edition updates to Virtuoso next week (very little work due to what's already in place).

That said, I better go listen to the podcast :-)

Virtuoso is Officially Open Source!

Tue, 11 Apr 2006 18:01:44 GMT

I am pleased to unveil (officially) the fact that Virtuoso is now available in Open Source form.

What Is Virtuoso?

A powerful next generation server product that implements otherwise distinct server functionality within a single server product. Think of Virtuoso as the server software analog of a dual core processor where each core represents a traditional server functionality realm.

Where did it come from?

The Virtuoso History page tells the whole story.

What Functionality Does It Provide?

The following:

1. Object-Relational DBMS Engine (ORDBMS like PostgreSQL and DBMS engine like MySQL)

2. XML Data Management (with support for XQuery, XPath, XSLT, and XML Schema)

3. RDF Triple Store (or Database) that supports SPARQL (Query Language, Transport Protocol, and XML Results Serialization format)

4. Service Oriented Architecture (it combines a BPEL Engine with an ESB)

5. Web Application Server (supports HTTP/WebDAV)

6. NNTP compliant Discussion Server And more. (see: Virtuoso Web Site)

90% of the aforementioned functionality has been available in Virtuoso since 2000 with the RDF Triple Store being the only 2006 item.

What Platforms are Supported

The Virtuoso build scripts have been successfully tested on Mac OS X (Universal Binary Target), Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris (AIX, HP-UX, and True64 UNIX will follow soon). A Windows Visual Studio project file is also in the works (ETA some time this week).

Why Open Source?

Simple, there is no value in a product of this magnitude remaining the "best kept secret". That status works well for our competitors, but absolutely works against the legions of new generation developers, systems integrators, and knowledge workers that need to be aware of what is actually achievable today with the right server architecture.

What Open Source License is it under?

GPL version 2.

What's the business model?

Dual licensing.

The Open Source version of Virtuoso includes all of the functionality listed above. While the Virtual Database (distributed heterogeneous join engine) and Replication Engine (across heterogeneous data sources) functionality will only be available in the commercial version.

Where is the Project Hosted?

On SourceForge.

Is there a product Blog?

Of course!

Up until this point, the Virtuoso Product Blog has been a covert live demonstration of some aspects of Virtuoso (Content Management). My Personal Blog and the Virtuoso Product Blog are actual Virtuoso instances, and have been so since I started blogging in 2003.

Is There a product Wiki?

Sure! The Virtuoso Product Wiki is also an instance of Virtuoso demonstrating another aspect of the Content Management prowess of Virtuoso.

What About Online Documentation?

Yep! Virtuoso Online Documentation is hosted via yet another Virtuoso instance. This particular instance also attempts to demonstrate Free Text search combined with the ability to repurpose well formed content in a myriad of forms (Atom, RSS, RDF, OPML, and OCS).

What about Tutorials and Demos?

The Virtuoso Online Tutorial Site has operated as a live demonstration and tutorial portal for a numbers of years. During the same timeframe (circa. 2001) we also assembled a few Screencast style demos (their look feel certainly show their age; updates are in the works).

BTW - We have also updated the Virtuoso FAQ and also released a number of missing Virtuoso White Papers (amongst many long overdue action items).

History of Programming Languages

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 04:12:00 GMT

History of Programming Languages Poster.

Ted Nelson's Perspective on Technology Lock-in

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:50:41 GMT

Ted Nelson expresses technology lock-in dislike. This applies to Operating System, Programming Language, Database, or any other forms.

Amen!

Video: Tribute to Innovation (featuring: Doug Engelbart)

Wed, 15 Feb 2006 19:08:55 GMT

A really nice video tribute to Doug Engelbart and the fundamental challenges of seeing way ahead of your time (aka. Prescience) :-)

A Sketch of Database History

Fri, 04 Nov 2005 21:14:55 GMT

I just stumbled across a 2003 article titled: A Sketch of Database History. A pretty good read for those interested in this very important technology.

Clone the Google APIs: Kill That Noise

Thu, 03 Nov 2005 22:44:04 GMT

I am kinda scratching my head a little re. the "Clone Google APIs" call; especially as Amazon's A9 already provides infrastructure for generic search. A9 is open at both ends; you can consume search services via a RESTian API or plug your search engine into A9 (playing the role of A9 search service provider).

Quick Example using my blog:

My Blog's Search Page

Search on pattern 'Web 2.0'

Hactivism

Linkblog

BlogSummary

Digest the rest of Dare's post:

Clone the Google APIs: Kill That Noise: "

Yesterday Dave Winer wrote in a post about cloning the Google API Dave Winer wrote

Let's make the Google API an open standard. Back in 2002, Google took a bold first step to enable open architecture search engines, by creating an API that allowed developers to build applications on top of their search engine. However, there were severe limits on the capacity of these applications. So we got a good demo of what might be, now three years later, it's time for the real thing.

and earlier that

If you didn't get a chance to hear yesterday's podcast, it recommends that Microsoft clone the Google API for search, without the keys, and without the limits. When a developer's application generates a lot of traffic, buy him a plane ticket and dinner, and ask how you both can make some money off their excellent booming application of search. This is something Google can't do, because search is their cash cow. That's why Microsoft should do it. And so should Yahoo. Also, there's no doubt Google will be competing with Apple soon, so they should be also thinking about ways to devalue Google's advantage.

This doesn't seem like a great idea to me for a wide variety of reasons but first, let's start with a history lesson before I tackle this specific issue

A Trip Down Memory Lane
This history lesson ~~used to be in~~ is in a post entitled The Tragedy of the API by Evan Williams ~~but seems to be gone now~~. Anyway, back in the early days of blogging the folks at Pyra [which eventually got bought by Google] created the Blogger API for their service. Since Blogspot/Blogger was a popular service, a the number of applications that used the API quickly grew. At this point Dave Winer decided that since the Blogger API was so popular he should implement it in his weblogging tools but then he decided that he didn't like some aspects of it such as application keys (sound familiar?) and did without them in his version of the API. Dave Winer's version of the Blogger API became the MetaWeblog API. These APIs became de facto standards and a number of other weblogging applications implemented them.

After a while, the folks at Pyra decided that their API needed to evolve due to various flaws in its design. As Diego Doval put it in his post a review of blogging APIs, The Blogger API is a joke, and a bad one at that. This lead to the creation of the Blogger API 2.0. At this point a heated debate erupted online where Dave Winer berated the Blogger folks for deviating from an industry standard. The irony of flaming a company for coming up with a v2 of their own API seemed to be lost on many of the people who participated in the debate. Eventually the Blogger API 2.0 went nowhere.

Today the blogging API world is a few de facto standards based on a hacky API created by a startup a few years ago, a number of site specific APIs (LiveJournal API, MovableType API, etc) and a number of inconsistently implemented versions of the Atom API.

On Cloning the Google Search API
To me the most salient point in the hijacking of the Blogger API from Pyra is that it didn't change the popularity of their service or even make Radio Userland (Dave Winer's product) catch up to them in popularity. This is important to note since this is Dave Winer's key argument for Microsoft cloning the Google API.

Off the top of my head, here are my top three technical reasons for Microsoft to ignore the calls to clone the Google Search APIs

Difference in Feature Set: The features exposed by the API do not run the entire gamut of features that other search engines may want to expose. Thus even if you implement something that looks a lot like the Google API, you'd have to extend it to add the functionality that it doesn't provide. For example, compare the features provided by the Google API to the features provided by the Yahoo! search API. I can count about half a dozen features in the Yahoo! API that aren't in the Google API.

Difference in Technology Choice: The Google API uses SOAP. This to me is a phenomenally bad technical decision because it raises the bar to performing a basic operation (data retrieval) by using a complex technology. I much prefer Yahoo!'s approach of providing a RESTful API and ~~MSN~~ Windows Live Search's approach of providing RSS search feeds and a SOAP API for the folks who need such overkill.

Unreasonable Demands: A number of Dave Winer's demands seem contradictory. He asks companies to not require application keys but then advises them to contact application developers who've built high traffic applications about revenue sharing. Exactly how are these applications to be identified without some sort of application ID? As for removing the limits on the services? I guess Dave is ignoring the fact that providing services costs money, which I seem to remember is why he sold weblogs.com to Verisign for a few million dollars. I do agree that some of the limits on existing search APIs aren't terribly useful. The Google API limit of 1000 queries a day seems to guarantee that you won't be able to power a popular application with the service.

Lack of Innovation: Copying Google sucks.

(Via Dare Obasanjo aka Carnage4Life.)

Rise of Relational Databases

Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:33:43 GMT

I suspect the subject of this post triggers the following questions:

1. Don't you mean the fall/death of Relational Databases?

2. Does anyone use these anymore?

3. What are these? Relational Database Management Systems (RDBMS) are alive and kicking as expressed eloquently in this excerpt from a book titled "Funding A Revolution":

Large-scale computer applications require rapid access to large amounts of data. A computerized checkout system in a supermarket must track the entire product line of the market. Airline reservation systems are used at many locations simultaneously to place passengers on numerous flights on different dates. Library computers store millions of entries and access citations from hundreds of publications. Transaction processing systems in banks and brokerage houses keep the accounts that generate international flows of capital. World Wide Web search engines scan thousands of Web pages to produce quantitative responses to queries almost instantly. Thousands of small businesses and organizations use databases to track everything from inventory and personnel to DNA sequences and pottery shards from archaeological digs.

Thus, databases not only represent significant infrastructure for computer applications, but they also process the transactions and exchanges that drive the U.S. economy.

My only addition to the excerpt above is that the impact of databases extends beyond the U.S. economy. We are talking about the global economy. And this will be so for all of time!

I came across this page while enriching the links in one of my earlier "history" related posts about Relational Database Technology pioneers. During this effort I also stumbled across another historic document titled: "1995 SQL Reunion".

Breaking the Web Wide Open!

Wed, 26 Oct 2005 19:28:47 GMT

Marc Canter's Breaking the Web Wide Open! article is something I found pretty late (by my normal discovery standards). This was partly due to the pre- and post- Web 2.0 event noise levels that have dumped the description of an important industry inflection into the "Bozo Bin" of many. Personally, I think we shouldn't confuse the Web 2.0 traditional-pitch-fest conference with an attempt to identify an important industry inflection).

Anyway, Marc's article is a very refreshing read because it provides a really good insight into the general landscape of a rapidly evolving Web alongside genuine appreciation of our broader timeless pursuit of "Openness".

To really help this document provide additional value have scrapped the content of the original post and dumped it below so that we can appreciate the value of the links embedded within the article (note: thanks to Virtuoso I only had to paste the content into my blog, the extraction to my Linkblog and Blog Summary Pages are simply features of my Virtuoso based Blog Engine):

Breaking the Web Wide Open! (complete story)

Even the web giants like AOL, Google, MSN, and Yahoo need to observe these open standards, or they'll risk becoming the "walled gardens" of the new web and be coolio no more.

Marc Canter [Broadband Mechanics, Inc.] | POSTED: 09.26.05 @12:00

Editorial Note: Several months ago, AlwaysOn got a personal invitation from Yahoo founder Jerry Yang "to see and give us feedback on our new social media product, y!360." We were happy to oblige and dutifully showed up, joining a conference room full of hard-core bloggers and new, new media types. The geeks gave Yahoo 360 an overwhelming thumbs down, with comments like, "So the only services I can use within this new network are Yahoo services? What if I don't use Yahoo IM?" In essence, the Yahoo team was booed for being "closed web," and we heartily agreed. With Yahoo 360, Yahoo continues building its own "walled garden" to control its 135 million customersan accusation also hurled at AOL in the early 1990s, before AOL migrated its private network service onto the web. As the Economist recently noted, "Yahoo, in short, has old media plans for the new-media era."

The irony to our view here is, of course, that today's AO Network is also a "closed web." In the end, Mr. Yang's thoughtful invitation and our ensuing disappointment in his new service led to the assignment of this article. It also confirmed our existing plan to completely revamp the AO Network around open standards. To tie it all together, we recruited the chief architect of our new site, the notorious Marc Canter, to pen this piece. We look forward to our reader feedback.

Breaking the Web Wide Open!
By Marc Canter

For decades, "walled gardens" of proprietary standards and content have been the strategy of dominant players in mainframe computer software, wireless telecommunications services, and the World Wide Webit was their successful lock-in strategy of keeping their customers theirs. But like it or not, those walls are tumbling down. Open web standards are being adopted so widely, with such value and impact, that the web giantsAmazon, AOL, eBay, Google, Microsoft, and Yahooare facing the difficult decision of opening up to what they don't control.

The online world is evolving into a new open web (sometimes called the Web 2.0), which is all about being personalized and customized for each user. Not only open source software, but open standards are becoming an essential component.

Many of the web giants have been using open source software for years. Most of them use at least parts of the LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, Perl/Python/PHP) stack, even if they aren't well-known for giving back to the open source community. For these incumbents that grew big on proprietary web services, the methods, practices, and applications of open source software development are difficult to fully adopt. And the next open source movementswhich will be as much about open standards as about codewill be a lot harder for the incumbents to exploit.

While the incumbents use cheap open source software to run their back-ends systems, their business models largely depend on proprietary software and algorithms. But our view a new slew of open software, open protocols, and open standards will confront the incumbents with the classic Innovator's Dilemma. Should they adopt these tools and standards, painfully cannibalizing their existing revenue for a new unproven concept, or should they stick with their currently lucrative model with the risk that eventually a bunch of upstarts eat their lunch?

Credit should go to several of the web giants who have been making efforts to "open up." Google, Yahoo, eBay, and Amazon all have Open APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) built into their data and systems. Any software developer can access and use them for whatever creative purposes they wish. This means that the API provider becomes an open platform for everyone to use and build on top of. This notion has expanded like wildfire throughout the blogosphere, so nowadays, Open APIs are pretty much required.

Other incumbents also have open strategies. AOL has got the RSS religion, providing a feedreader and RSS search in order to escape the "walled garden of content" stigma. Apple now incorporates podcasts, the "personal radio shows" that are latest rage in audio narrowcasting, into iTunes. Even Microsoft is supporting open standards, for example by endorsing SIP (Session Initiation Protocol) for internet telephony and conferencing over Skype's proprietary format or one of its own devising.

But new open standards and protocols are in use, under construction, or being proposed every day, pushing the envelope of where we are right now. Many of these standards are coming from startup companies and small groups of developers, not from the giants. Together with the Open APIs, those new standards will contribute to a new, open infrastructure. Tens of thousands of developers will use and improve this open infrastructure to create new kinds of web-based applications and services, to offer web users a highly personalized online experience.

A Brief History of Openness

At this point, I have to admit that I am not just a passive observer, full-time journalist or "just some blogger"but an active evangelist and developer of these standards. It's the vision of "open infrastructure" that's driving my company and the reason why I'm writing this article. This article will give you some of the background behind on these standards, and what the evolution of the next generation of open standards will look like.

Starting back in the 1980s, establishing a software standard was a key strategy for any software company. My former company, MacroMind (which became Macromedia), achieved this goal early on with Director. As Director evolved into Flash, the world saw that other companies besides Microsoft, Adobe, and Apple could establish true cross-platform, independent media standards.

Then Tim Berners-Lee and Marc Andreessen came along, and changed the rules of the software business and of entrepreneurialism. No matter how entrenched and "standardized" software was, the rug could still get pulled out from under it. Netscape did it to Microsoft, and then Microsoft did it back to Netscape. The web evolved, and lots of standards evolved with it. The leading open source standards (such as the LAMP stack) became widely used alternatives to proprietary closed-source offerings.

Open standards are more than just technology. Open standards mean sharing, empowering, and community support. Someone floats a new idea (or meme) and the community runs with it – with each person making their own contributions to the standard – evolving it without a moment's hesitation about "giving away their intellectual property."

One good example of this was Dave Sifry, who built the Technorati blog-tracking technology inspired by the Blogging Ecosystem, a weekend project by young hacker Phil Pearson. Dave liked what he saw and he ran with itturning Technorati into what it is today.

Dave Winer has contributed enormously to this area of open standards. He defined and personally created several open standards and protocolssuch as RSS, OPML, and XML-RPC. Dave has also helped build the blogosphere through his enthusiasm and passion.

By 2003, hundreds of programmers were working on creating and establishing new standards for almost everything. The best of these new standards have evolved into compelling web services platforms – such as del.icio.us, Webjay, or Flickr. Some have even spun off formal standards – like XSPF (a standard for playlists) or instant messaging standard XMPP (also known as Jabber).

Today's Open APIs are complemented by standardized Schemasthe structure of the data itself and its associated meta-data. Take for example a podcasting feed. It consists of: a) the radio show itself, b) information on who is on the show, what the show is about and how long the show is (the meta-data) and also c) API calls to retrieve a show (a single feed item) and play it from a specified server.

The combination of Open APIs, standardized schemas for handling meta-data, and an industry which agrees on these standards are breaking the web wide open right now. So what new open standards should the web incumbentsand yoube watching? Keep an eye on the following developments:

Identity
Attention
Open Media
Microcontent Publishing
Open Social Networks
Tags
Pinging
Routing
Open Communications
Device Management and Control

1. Identity

Right now, you don't really control your own online identity. At the core of just about every online piece of software is a membership system. Some systems allow you to browse a site anonymouslybut unless you register with the site you can't do things like search for an article, post a comment, buy something, or review it. The problem is that each and every site has its own membership system. So you constantly have to register with new systems, which cannot share dataeven you'd want them to. By establishing a "single sign-on" standard, disparate sites can allow users to freely move from site to site, and let them control the movement of their personal profile data, as well as any other data they've created.

With Passport, Microsoft unsuccessfully attempted to force its proprietary standard on the industry. Instead, a world is evolving where most people assume that users want to control their own data, whether that data is their profile, their blog posts and photos, or some collection of their past interactions, purchases, and recommendations. As long as users can control their digital identity, any kind of service or interaction can be layered on top of it.

Identity 2.0 is all about users controlling their own profile data and becoming their own agents. This way the users themselves, rather than other intermediaries, will profit from their ID info. Once developers start offering single sign-on to their users, and users have trusted places to store their datawhich respect the limits and provide access controls over that data, users will be able to access personalized services which will understand and use their personal data.

Identity 2.0 may seem like some geeky, visionary future standard that isn't defined yet, but by putting each user's digital identity at the core of all their online experiences, Identity 2.0 is becoming the cornerstone of the new open web.

The Initiatives:
Right now, Identity 2.0 is under construction through various efforts from Microsoft (the "InfoCard" component built into the Vista operating system and its "Identity Metasystem"), Sxip Identity, Identity Commons, Liberty Alliance, LID (NetMesh's Lightweight ID), and SixApart's OpenID.

More Movers and Shakers:
Identity Commons and Kaliya Hamlin, Sxip Identity and Dick Hardt, the Identity Gang and Doc Searls, Microsoft's Kim Cameron, Craig Burton, Phil Windley, and Brad Fitzpatrick, to name a few.

2. Attention

How many readers know what their online attention is worth? If you don't, Google and Yahoo dothey make their living off our attention. They know what we're searching for, happily turn it into a keyword, and sell that keyword to advertisers. They make money off our attention. We don't.

Technorati and friends proposed an attention standard, Attention.xml, designed to "help you keep track of what you've read, what you're spending time on, and what you should be paying attention to." AttentionTrust is an effort by Steve Gillmor and Seth Goldstein to standardize on how captured end-user performance, browsing, and interest data are used.

Blogger Peter Caputa gives a good summary of AttentionTrust:
"As we use the web, we reveal lots of information about ourselves by what we pay attention to. Imagine if all of that information could be stored in a nice neat little xml file. And when we travel around the web, we can optionally share it with websites or other people. We can make them pay for it, lease it ... we get to decide who has access to it, how long they have access to it, and what we want in return. And they have to tell us what they are going to do with our Attention data."

So when you give your attention to sites that adhere to the AttentionTrust, your attention rights (you own your attention, you can move your attention, you can pay attention and be paid for it, and you can see how your attention is used) are guaranteed. Attention data is crucial to the future of the open web, and Steve and Seth are making sure that no one entity or oligopoly controls it.

Movers and Shakers:
Steve Gillmor, Seth Goldstein, Dave Sifry and the other Attention.xml folks.

3. Open Media

Proprietary media standardsFlash, Windows Media, and QuickTime, to name a few helped liven up the web. But they are proprietary standards that try to keep us locked in, and they weren't created from scratch to handle today's online content. That's why, for many of us, an Open Media standard has been a holy grail. Yahoo's new Media RSS standard brings us one step closer to achieving open media, as do Ogg Vorbis audio codecs, XSPF playlists, or MusicBrainz. And several sites offer digital creators not only a place to store their content, but also to sell it.

Media RSS (being developed by Yahoo with help from the community) extends RSS and combines it with "RSS enclosures" adds metadata to any media itemto create a comprehensive solution for media "narrowcasters." To gain acceptance for Media RSS, Yahoo knows it has to work with the community. As an active member of this community, I can tell you that we'll create Media RSS equivalents for rdf (an alternative subscription format) and Atom (yet another subscription format), so no one will be able to complain that Yahoo is picking sides in format wars.

When Yahoo announced the purchase of Flickr, Yahoo founder Jerry Yang insinuated that Yahoo is acquiring "open DNA" to turn Yahoo into an open standards player. Yahoo is showing what happens when you take a multi-billion dollar company and make openness one of its core valuesso Google, beware, even if Google does have more research fellows and Ph.D.s.

The open media landscape is far and wide, reaching from game machine hacks and mobile phone downloads to PC-driven bookmarklets, players, and editors, and it includes many other standardization efforts. XSPF is an open standard for playlists, and MusicBrainz is an alternative to the proprietary (and originally effectively stolen) database that Gracenote licenses.

Ourmedia.org is a community front-end to Brewster Kahle's Internet Archive. Brewster has promised free bandwidth and free storage forever to any content creators who choose to share their content via the Internet Archive. Ourmedia.org is providing an easy-to-use interface and community to get content in and out of the Internet Archive, giving ourmedia.org users the ability to share their media anywhere they wish, without being locked into a particular service or tool. Ourmedia plans to offer open APIs and an open media registry that interconnects other open media repositories into a DNS-like registry (just like the www domain system), so folks can browse and discover open content across many open media services. Systems like Brightcove and Odeo support the concept of an open registry, and hope to work with digital creators to sell their work to fulfill the financial aspect of the "Long Tail."

More Movers and Shakers:
Creative Commons, the Open Media Network, Jay Dedman, Ryanne Hodson, Michael Verdi, Eli Chapman, Kenyatta Cheese, Doug Kaye, Brad Horowitz, Lucas Gonze, Robert Kaye, Christopher Allen, Brewster Kahle, JD Lasica, and indeed, Marc Canter, among others.

4. Microcontent Publishing

Unstructured content is cheap to create, but hard to search through. Structured content is expensive to create, but easy to search. Microformats resolve the dilemma with simple structures that are cheap to use and easy to search.

The first kind of widely adopted microcontent is blogging. Every post is an encapsulated idea, addressable via a URL called a permalink. You can syndicate or subscribe to this microcontent using RSS or an RSS equivalent, and news or blog aggregators can then display these feeds in a convenient readable fashion. But a blog post is just a block of unstructured text—not a bad thing, but just a first step for microcontent. When it comes tostructured data, such as personal identity profiles, product reviews, or calendar-type event data, RSS was not designed to maintain the integrity of the structures.

Right now, blogging doesn't have the underlying structure necessary for full-fledged microcontent publishing. But that will change. Think of local information services (such as movie listings, event guides, or restaurant reviews) that any college kid can access and use in her weekend programming project to create new services and tools.

Today's blogging tools will evolve into microcontent publishing systems, and will help spread the notion of structured data across the blogosphere. New ways to store, represent and produce microcontent will create new standards, such as Structured Blogging and Microformats. Microformats differ from RSS feeds in that you can't subscribe to them. Instead, Microformats are embedded into webpages and discovered by search engines like Google or Technorati. Microformats are creating common definitions for "What is a review or event? What are the specific fields in the data structure?" They can also specify what we can do with all this information.OPML (Outline Processor Markup Language) is a hierarchical file format for storing microcontent and structured data. It was developed by Dave Winer of RSS and podcast fame.

Events are one popular type of microcontent. OpenEvents is already working to create shared databases of standardized events, which would get used by a new generation of event portals—such as Eventful/EVDB, Upcoming.org, and WhizSpark. The idea of OpenEvents is that event-oriented systems and services can work together to establish shared events databases (and associated APIs) that any developer could then use to create and offer their own new service or application. OpenReviews is still in the conceptual stage, but it would make it possible to provide open alternatives to closed systems like Epinions, and establish a shared database of local and global reviews. Its shared open servers would be filled with all sorts of reviews for anyone to access.

Why is this important? Because I predict that in the future, 10 times more people will be writing reviews than maintaining their own blog. The list of possible microcontent standards goes on: OpenJobpostings, OpenRecipes, and even OpenLists. Microsoft recently revealed that it has been working on an important new kind of microcontent: Lists—so OpenLists will attempt to establish standards for the kind of lists we all use, such as lists of Links, lists of To Do Items, lists of People, Wish Lists, etc.

Movers and Shakers:
Tantek Çelik and Kevin Marks of Technorati, Danny Ayers, Eric Meyer, Matt Mullenweg, Rohit Khare, Adam Rifkin, Arnaud Leene, Seb Paquet, Alf Eaton, Phil Pearson, Joe Reger, Bob Wyman among others.

5. Open Social Networks

I'll never forget the first time I met Jonathan Abrams, the founder of Friendster. He was arrogant and brash and he claimed he "owned" all his users, and that he was going to monetize them and make a fortune off them. This attitude robbed Friendster of its momentum, letting MySpace, Facebook, and other social networks take Friendster's place.

Jonathan's notion of social networks as a way to control users is typical of the Web 1.0 business model and its attitude towards users in general. Social networks have become one of the battlegrounds between old and new ways of thinking. Open standards for Social Networking will define those sides very clearly. Since meeting Jonathan, I have been working towards finding and establishing open standards for social networks. Instead of closed, centralized social networks with 10 million people in them, the goal is making it possible to have 10 million social networks that each have 10 people in them.

FOAF (which stands for Friend Of A Friend, and describes people and relationships in a way that computers can parse) is a schema to represent not only your personal profile's meta-data, but your social network as well. Thousands of researchers use the FOAF schema in their "Semantic Web" projects to connect people in all sorts of new ways. XFN is a microformat standard for representing your social network, while vCard (long familiar to users of contact manager programs like Outlook) is a microformat that contains your profile information. Microformats are baked into any xHTML webpage, which means thatany blog, social network page, or any webpage in general can "contain" your social network in itand be used byany compatible tool, service or application.

PeopleAggregator is an earlier project now being integrated into open content management framework Drupal. The PeopleAggregator APIs will make it possible to establish relationships, send messages, create or join groups, and post between different social networks. (Sneak preview: this technology will be available in the upcoming GoingOn Network.)

All of these open social networking standards mean that inter-connected social networks will form a mesh that will parallel the blogosphere. This vibrant, distributed, decentralized world will be driven by open standards: personalized online experiences are what the new open web will be all aboutand what could be more personalized than people's networks?

Movers and Shakers:
Eric Sigler, Joel De Gan, Chris Schmidt, Julian Bond, Paul Martino, Mary Hodder, Drummond Reed, Dan Brickley, Randy Farmer, and Kaliya Hamlin, to name a few.

6. Tags

Nowadays, no self-respecting tool or service can ship without tags. Tags are keywords or phrases attached to photos, blog posts, URLs, or even video clips. These user- and creator-generated tags are an open alternative to what used to be the domain of librarians and information scientists: categorizing information and content using taxonomies. Tags are instead creating "folksonomies."

The recently proposed OpenTags concept would be an open, community-owned version of the popular Technorati Tags service. It would aggregate the usage of tags across a wide range of services, sites, and content tools. In addition to Technorati's current tag features, OpenTags would let groups of people share their tags in "TagClouds." Open tagging is likely to include some of the open identity features discussed above, to create a tag system that is resilient to spam, and yet trustable across sites all over the web.

OpenTags owes a debt to earlier versions of shared tagging systems, which include Topic Exchange and something called the k-collectora knowledge management tag aggregatorfrom Italian company eVectors.

Movers & Shakers:
Phil Pearson, Matt Mower , Paolo Valdemarin, and Mary Hodder and Drummond Reed again, among others.

7. Pinging

Websites used to be mostly static. Search engines that crawled (or "spidered") them every so often did a good enough job to show reasonably current versions of your cousin's homepage or even Time magazine's weekly headlines. But when blogging took off, it became hard for search engines to keep up. (Google has only just managed to offer blog-search functionality, despite buying Blogger back in early 2003.)

To know what was new in the blogosphere, users couldn't depend on services that spidered webpages once in a while. The solution: a way for blogs themselves to automatically notify blog-tracking sites that they'd been updated. Weblogs.com was the first blog "ping service": it displayed the name of a blog whenever that blog was updated. Pinging sites helped the blogosphere grow, and more tools, services, and portals started using pinging in new and different ways. Dozens of pinging services and sitesmost of which can't talk to each othersprang up.

Matt Mullenweg (the creator of open source blogging software WordPress) decided that a one-stop service for pinging was needed. He created Ping-o-Maticwhich aggregates ping services and simplifies the pinging process for bloggers and tool developers. With Ping-o-Matic, any developer can alert all of the industry's blogging tools and tracking sites at once. This new kind of open standard, with shared infrastructure, is a critical to the scalability of Web 2.0 services.

As Matt said:

There are a number of services designed specifically for tracking and connecting blogs. However it would be expensive for all the services to crawl all the blogs in the world all the time. By sending a small ping to each service you let them know you've updated so they can come check you out. They get the freshest data possible, you don't get a thousand robots spidering your site all the time. Everybody wins.

Movers and Shakers:
Matt Mullenweg, Jim Winstead, Dave Winer

8. Routing

Bloggers used to have to manually enter the links and content snippets of blog posts or news items they wanted to blog. Today, some RSS aggregators can send a specified post directly into an associated blogging tool: as bloggers browse through the feeds they subscribe to, they can easily specify and send any post they wish to "reblog" from their news aggregator or feed reader into their blogging tool. (This is usually referred to as "BlogThis.") As structured blogging comes into its own (see the section on Microcontent Publishing), it will be increasingly important to maintain the structural integrity of these pieces of microcontent when reblogging them.

Promising standard RedirectThis will combine a "BlogThis"-like capability while maintaining the integrity of the microcontent. RedirectThis will let bloggers and content developers attach a simple "PostThis" button to their posts. Clicking on that button will send that post to the reader/blogger's favorite blogging tool. This favorite tool is specified at the RedirectThis web service, where users register their blogging tool of choice. RedirectThis also helps maintain the integrity and structure of microcontentthen it's just up to the user to prefer a blogging tool that also attains that lofty goal of microcontent integrity.

OutputThis is another nascent web services standard, to let bloggers specify what "destinations" they'd like to have as options in their blogging tool. As new destinations are added to the service, more checkboxes would get added to their blogging toolallowing them to route their published microcontent to additional destinations.

Movers and Shakers:
Michael Migurski, Lucas Gonze

9. Open Communications

Likely, you've experienced the joys of finding friends on AIM or Yahoo Messenger, or the convenience of Skyping with someone overseas. Not that you're about to throw away your mobile phone or BlackBerry, but for many, also having access to Instant Messaging (IM) and Voice over IP (VoIP) is crucial.

IM and VoIP are mainstream technologies that already enjoy the benefits of open standards. Entire industries are bornright this secondbased around these open standards. Jabber has been an open IM technology for yearsin fact, as XMPP, it was officially dubbed a standard by the IETF. Although becoming an official IETF standard is usually the kiss of death, Jabber looks like it'll be around for a while, as entire generations of collaborative, work-group applications and services have been built on top of its messaging protocol. For VoIP, Skype is clearly the leading standard todaythough one could argue just how "open" it is (and defenders of the IETF's SIP standard often do). But it is free and user-friendly, so there won't be much argument from users about it being insufficiently open. Yet there may be a cloud on Skype's horizon: web behemoth Google recently released a beta of Google Talk, an IM client committed to open standards. It currently supports XMPP, and will support SIP for VoIP calls.

Movers and Shakers:
Jeremie Miller, Henning Schulzrinne, Jon Peterson, Jeff Pulver

10. Device Management and Control

To access online content, we're using more and more devices. BlackBerrys, iPods, Treos, you name it. As the web evolves, more and more different devices will have to communicate with each other to give us the content we want when and where we want it. No-one wants to be dependent on one vendor anymorelike, say, Sonyfor their laptop, phone, MP3 player, PDA, and digital camera, so that it all works together. We need fully interoperable devices, and the standards to make that work. And to fully make use of how content is moving online content and innovative web services, those standards need to be open.

MIDI (musical instrument digital interface), one of the very first open standards in music, connected disparate vendors' instruments, post-production equipment, and recording devices. But MIDI is limited, and MIDI II has been very slow to arrive. Now a new standard for controlling musical devices has emerged: OSC (Open SoundControl). This protocol is optimized for modern networking technology and inter-connects music, video and controller devices with "other multimedia devices." OSC is used by a wide range of developers, and is being taken up in the mainstream MIDI marketplace.

Another open-standards-based device management technology is ZigBee, for building wireless intelligence and network monitoring into all kinds of devices. ZigBee is supported by many networking, consumer electronics, and mobile device companies.

· · · · · ·

The Change to Openness

The rise of open source software and its "architecture of participation" are completely shaking up the old proprietary-web-services-and-standards approach. Sun Microsystemswhose proprietary Java standard helped define the Web 1.0is opening its Solaris OS and has even announced the apparent paradox of an open-source Digital Rights Management system.

Today's incumbents will have to adapt to the new openness of the Web 2.0. If they stick to their proprietary standards, code, and content, they'll become the new walled gardensplaces users visit briefly to retrieve data and content from enclosed data silos, but not where users "live." The incumbents' revenue models will have to change. Instead of "owning" their users, users will know they own themselves, and will expect a return on their valuable identity and attention. Instead of being locked into incompatible media formats, users will expect easy access to digital content across many platforms.

Yesterday's web giants and tomorrow's users will need to find a mutually beneficial new balancebetween open and proprietary, developer and user, hierarchical and horizontal, owned and shared, and compatible and closed.

Marc Canter is an active evangelist and developer of open standards. Early in his career, Marc founded MacroMind, which became Macromedia. These days, he is CEO of Broadband Mechanics, a founding member of the Identity Gang and of ourmedia.org. Broadband Mechanics is currently developing the GoingOn Network (with the AlwaysOn Network), as well as an open platform for social networking called the PeopleAggregator.

A version of the above post appears in the Fall 2005 issue of AlwaysOn's quarterly print blogozine, and ran as a four-part series on the AlwaysOn Network website.

(Via Marc's Voice.)