[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [xtm-wg] Re: XTM tag line
-----Original Message-----Here are my suggestions:
From: Nikita Ogievetsky [mailto:nogievet@cogx.com]
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 12:54 PM
To: xtm-wg@eGroups.com
Subject: Re: [xtm-wg] Re: XTM tag line
Information Space navigation aids
Topic Maps: from chaos to order
Topic Maps: Find way in the infospace
Beacon Network for the Web
Grasp Information Universe
Cognizing the Web
Comprehending the Web
Discerning the Web
World Wide Brain
Building World Wide Brain
Creating World Wide Brain
I just followed the rule of "ing-form" (present participle)
Is it so important
(pardon my "non-native" ignorance :-))
Then we have the famous:
(Charles Goldfarb?)
"GPS of the Information Universe"
I second this:
[Chris Angus]
>Can I also throw in "Understanding the web"?
Nikita.
[Andrius Kulikauskas]
> > pconn@gca.org wrote:
> >
> > All suggestions and seconds posted to xtm-wg list by today (Monday),
> > 2:00 PM eastern time. I'll create a poll with all options that have
> > been seconded, and we'll conclude the poll tomorrow morning (Tuesday)
> > at 11:00 am eastern time.
>
> Here's what we have so far:
>
> Candidates:
>
> *) Untangling the Web
> *) Weaving the Web
> *) Navigate Web Topics Meaningfully
> *) Put Meaning In, Get Knowledge Out
> *) The Meaningful Web
> *) Enabling Subject-based Collaborative Commerce
> *) Collaborative Corporate Memory, Anyone?
> *) Making the other 90% of corporate information findable
> *) Industrial-strength Findability
> *) Subject-based power to exploit information assets
> *) Making The Web Mean Something
> *) subject-based power to exploit information assets
> *) Making irrelevant information disappear.
> *) Bringing more knowledge than information
> *) Find your way through information to knowledge
> *) Mapping the web
> _________________________
>
> Suggestions, need to be seconded:
>
> *) XTM: Star chart for the infoverse
> *) Powering the World-Wide Semantic Web
> *) From information to knowledge
> *) Give context for information
> *) Give context to information
> *) For a structured web
> *) Structure the web
> *) Structure web content
> *) Roadmaps and Catalogues for Cyberspace
> *) Binding the points!
> *) Understanding the web
> *) StyleSheets for Knowledge
> *) Put the semantics into the web.
> *) Map Your Meaning, Share It With Others, Integrate Your World
> *) Meaningful Links and Sensible Pointers
> *) Making The Web Mean Something
> *) Navigate Web Topics Meaningfully
> *) A Simple, Flexible Model That Allows Meaningful
> Browsing/Navigating/Searching/Querying of Web-based Information.
> *) Knowledge Maps for Everyone
> *) Put Meaning In, Get Knowledge Out
> *) Just Add Meaning
> *) Map Your Meaning and Share Your Map
> *) Show Me Your Map, That I May Understand You
> *) Semantics In, Precision Out
> *) Meaningful Links Allow Efficient, Precise Searching
> *) Stir In Meaning, Undangle Pointers, and Presto
> *) Enabling global knowledge connectivity
> *) The Meaningful Web
> *) Enabling Subject-based Collaborative Commerce
> *) Collaborative Corporate Memory, Anyone?
> *) Making the other 90% of corporate information findable
> *) The Haystacks Disappear, The Needles Remain
> *) 7 search hits are interesting, 7,000 are not
> *) Industrial-strength Findability
> *) Many languages, One combinable finding resource
> *) 'way, 'way beyond full text searching
> *) subject-based power to exploit information assets
> *) Making irrelevant information disappear.
>
> Yours,
> Andrius
>
> Andrius Kulikauskas
> XTM Marketing Committee member
>
> ******************************************
> Here are some excerpts from letters:
>
> >*) The Meaningful Web
> >
> >
> >4) It is short - does it have any unwanted connotations?
> >5) It's defensible - does it capture what we're doing?
>
> Yes, but to a somewhat lesser extent than untangling the web,
> primarily I think it has a more bland tone.
> I prefer the more 'positive' action oriented, 'untangling'
> (get rid of the mess) or weave 'make sense of'
>
> Regards DaveP
>
> ******************************************
>
> Pam Gennusa:
> Hello
>
> Although Weaving the Web has nice alliteration, I don't think it really
> says
> much about what the benefit is. Untangling the web is better, but
> focuses on
> a negative which may be good in the short term, but may not be good 2-3
> years down the road. From the list below, I'm pulled to the ideas that
> focus
> on 'meaning'
>
> ******************************************
>
> Powering the World-Wide Semantic Web
>
> especially if the word 'semantic' was handwritten in like an editor's
> note
> maybe the word 'semantic' should be 'meaningful'
> maybe the word 'powering' should be 'the power behind'
> but something along the lines of XTM being the power behind something
> really
> useful
>
> Pam Gennusa
>
> ******************************************
> Untangling is good. I'd vote with Eric on this.
> My colleague Jay points out that "Weaving the Web" is the title of a
> book by
> Tim Berners-Lee. I think that probably disqualifies it - we don't want
> lawsuits or
> accusations of misappropriating Tim's words. I think that makes
> "Untangling
> the Web" and even stronger candidate!
>
> Daniel
>
> ******************************************
>
> I vote for "Untangling the Web"
> (I find it's better than the one I proposed)
>
> Michel
>
> ******************************************
> My paranoid fantasy that is that "Untangling the web" could be taken as
> too close to TBL's title.
>
> Perhaps the marketers are familiar with the (legal and other) issues
> involved with tag lines that are not identical but very similar, and
> make a judgment.
>
> S.
>
> ******************************************
> "Web" oriented slogans are probably good marketing, but somewhere along
> the
> way we shouldn't forget that there are lots of uses that aren't on the
> Web
> (like what I talked about in Montréal).
>
> Jim Mason
>
> ******************************************
> Some comments from letters:
>
> Eric Freese:
> I'm not sure "Style Sheets" is appropriate. I liked Dave's "Untangling
> the Web". There have to be some pretty good "Map" metaphors that could
> be
> used here.
>
> ******************************************
> Jean Delahousse:
> I think it should not be too technical. I like things like " Weaving the
> Web", it's active, simple, clear
>
> ******************************************
> Murray Altheim:
> The last thing I'd like XTM to be associated with is style sheets. It
> really diminishes the importance of what topic maps are about,
> suggesting we're about appearance rather than actually content. The fur
> coat is more important than the person wearing it, etc.
>
> ******************************************
> Steve Newcomb
> [Re: StyleSheets for Knowledge]
> Eeek! I object. This slogan appears to define what topic maps are,
> while ignoring at least half of the capabilities and value of topic
> maps. I think it's misleading. Topic maps are also about information
> management (imposition of arbitrary topical structure, infoglut
> control, elimination of redundancy, collaborative indexing, making
> finding information an interchangeable, licensable resource,
> etc. etc.). The information management angle is at least as
> significant, in terms of human productivity enhancement, as the "Style
> Sheets for Knowledge" angle, which I think refers to the ability of
> topic maps to allow information resources to be hidden in ways that
> are highly adapted to the user's context (user knowledge, interests,
> delivery platform, etc.). With topic maps, you get both of these
>
To Post a message, send it to: xtm-wg@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
| eGroups Sponsor |
|
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC