[xtm-wg] RE: [xtm-mktg] Re: XTM tag line

["Pam Gennusa" <pam@gennusa.u-net.com>]

Dianne verbally suggested Weaving the Semantic Web to me (not sure if she
put it in an email yet), and I think this is better than Weaving the Web, so
could this be considered a seconded suggestion (Dianne mutes and Pam
seconds)?

Pam

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrius Kulikauskas [mailto:ms@ms.lt]
> Sent: Monday, 20 November, 2000 5:04 PM
> To: xtm-wg@egroups.com
> Cc: xtm-mktg@egroups.com
> Subject: [xtm-mktg] Re: XTM tag line
>
>
> > 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
>
> -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor
> -------------------------~-~>
> eLerts
> It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
> http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/4/_/_/_/974740445/
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------_->
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> xtm-mktg-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
>


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/1/_/337252/_/974764194/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To Post a message, send it to:   xtm-wg@eGroups.com

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: xtm-wg-unsubscribe@eGroups.com