Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [govtrack] GovTrack Machine Tags

Expand Messages
  • Joe Germuska
    ... Josh: Thanks for your response. I understand your preference for unambiguous semantic annotations. I am of mixed mind myself, as I feel that the populist
    Message 1 of 5 , Jun 18, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      On 6/18/07, Josh Tauberer <tauberer@...> wrote:

      Joe Germuska wrote:
      > Has there been any discussion of a machine tag convention for GovTrack
      > "nodes"? (see http://machinetags.org/ or
      > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_tag
      > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_tag>) If not, is there any interest?

      Hi, Joe.

      I'm not a particularly big fan of tags. I see them as a very short term,
      unorganized solution to a much larger problem.

      Josh:

      Thanks for your response.

      I understand your preference for unambiguous semantic annotations.  I am of mixed mind myself, as I feel that the populist potential of tags is important.  The problem is whether machine tags are simple enough that they'll be popularly adopted, or whether they will end up not gaining traction. 

      Or, the problem (if one is not particularly populist) may be that users can't be trusted to tag things correctly, even if tags are not considered so ambiguous.  However, if taggers adhere to a contract, there is no reason that any given tag can't be mapped to a URI appropriate for use in an RDF triple subject or object.

      So, one could easily say that, within the machine tag convention,
      govtrack:person=300038
      means exactly
      tag:govshare.info,2005:data/us/congress/people/D000563

      so that you could read a feed of Delicious bookmarks and construct RDF triples from them that say
      (A New York Times article) (is about) (Dick Durbin).  Is "aboutness" interesting enough?  I have trouble believing that even experts are going to make much more meaningful relationships.  [ (A Drudge Report posting) (slanders) (a member of congress) (A letter to the editor) (totally misrepresents) (the bill to outlaw television) ?? ]  But even if they were going to, one could come up with a taggish compression pairing common predicates with well-identified objects. 

      I know you don't care for the term "tagging", but I can't think of anything else to call "every day people annotating pages they come across."  Do you see any general use cases for human-mediated structuring of (gardening?) the pool of data that makes up GovTrack?  Right now, everything, or just about, is generated by transforming data files, correct?  Are there places where human intelligence would make something better? 

      If there are, then there need to be tools to help -- no one writes RDF with a text editor for very long.  But there's no reason one couldn't use tag autocompletion and human-readable names to make it pretty easy for people to contribute data "from the field," if there's data that is to be desired.

      In one sense, this isn't much different from using the Technorati feed of people who have linked to the bill.  But realistically, maybe just the effort devoted to writing a post about a bill vs. tag-and-run ends up being a useful way to keep the signal-to-noise ratio better.

      but now I'm starting to ramble...

      Joe

      (PS Is GovTrack data part of Freebase.com's data pile?)


      --
      Joe Germuska
      Joe@... * http://blog.germuska.com   
      "I felt so good I told the leader how to follow."
      -- Sly Stone


    • Bryan L. Fordham
      Personally, I love the idea of tagging, though not necessarily as something that would be on the front page. It s on my todo list at critter watch, though
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 19, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Personally, I love the idea of tagging, though not necessarily as
        something that would be on the front page. It's on my todo list at
        critter watch, though admittedly it's pretty far down the list.

        But yeah, there are a number of problems with it. And some good things.
        I think letting folks tag items, and other users can optionally view
        them (or perhaps view the most popular tags for some items) would be a
        fun experiment.

        --B
      • Joe Germuska
        Just to be clear ... Just for clarity s sake, let me point out that I m not talking at all about GovTrack allowing users to apply tags to GovTrack data. I
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 19, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Just to be clear

          On 6/19/07, Bryan L. Fordham <bfordham@...> wrote:

          Personally, I love the idea of tagging, though not necessarily as
          something that would be on the front page. It's on my todo list at
          critter watch, though admittedly it's pretty far down the list.

          But yeah, there are a number of problems with it. And some good things.
          I think letting folks tag items, and other users can optionally view
          them (or perhaps view the most popular tags for some items) would be a
          fun experiment.



          Just for clarity's sake, let me point out that I'm not talking at all about GovTrack allowing users to apply tags to GovTrack data.  I don't have a very strong opinion about whether or not GovTrack should support that. 

          Take, for example S. 1348: A bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other purposes GovTrack already shows us ten blogs that have linked to the tracking page for that bill, using Technorati. 

          But not all sources will know to (or choose to) link to the GovTrack page.  What if I'm passionate about this issue and I find this article on MSNBC about the bill.  If I knew how to tag it reliably in Delicious, then Josh could set up another feed alongside the Technorati one which would pick up on my recognition that MSNBC was talking about S. 1348, even though MSNBC didn't link back to GovTrack, or even use the bill number in the article.  Of course, with the right convention, this is not limited to GovTrack by any means.  Political blogs of any persuasion could do the same thing.

          Now, maybe one of Josh's hesitations is the question about how many taggers in the field would make the correct links, and that's a valid question.  For blogs with more of an editorial position, I think the simple answer is to limit the number of users whose tags are even considered.  And maybe at the end of the day, GovTrack itself wouldn't want to make those choices and wouldn't want to accept a totally unfiltered tag feed (although the Delicious spammers would probably use a lot of other tags first before they start abusing wonky machine-oriented tags).  But since this is a list of people who are generally interested in applying technology to civics, I thought I'd float it...

          I hope the above example clarifies my point.  Should anyone be at all interested, I wrote a few things about this general topic that have drifted off the front page of my blog:
          http://blog.germuska.com/?p=496
          http://blog.germuska.com/?p=497

          Joe

          --
          Joe Germuska
          Joe@... * http://blog.germuska.com    

          "I felt so good I told the leader how to follow."
          -- Sly Stone
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.