Re: TriQL.P in PiggyBank

From: Phil Archer <>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:40:18 +0100

Chris's work on Trust is the kind of thing that gets the attention of policy

I'm involved (heavily) in a project called Quatro which is the end result of
a desire by the European Parliament to see the widespread take up of what
they call quality labels, what we might call trustmarks.

At present, trustmarks (like Truste, BBBOnline etc.) don't make any use of
machine-understandable data. A reviewed site is allowed to include a logo
that hyperlinks to the trustmark scheme's database. A user clicking the logo
sees an HTML page. Quatro aims to do two things in this area:

1. Define a royalty-free vocabulary that can be used by any trust mark
scheme (they all look for things like a contact route, secure payments
system etc.)
2. Define a platform for carrying the data - which is where RDF Content
Labels come in

Our project partners include a general trustmark scheme [1] and a medical
trustmark scheme [2] so with those 2 and ICRA we should have at least 3
Content Label within a few months.

But - how do you trust the label? That's where the Berlin work really comes
into its own and why Piggy Bank/Longwell is so interesting.

The most concisely written explanation of the Quatro project as a whole is
given in the paper I've just submitted to DC2005 [3]



----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Bizer" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2005 3:56 PM
Subject: AW: TriQL.P in PiggyBank

> Hi Stefano,
>>Before we talk about implementation details, can you tell us more about
>>the usecases and scenarios you think this functionality could be useful?
>>I mean, 'trust' is such a big and subjective concept and I would like to
>>know what *you* mean by this.
> TriQL.P supports the formulation of subjective trust policies and is thus
> usable within a wide range of scenarios. See TriQL.P website and papers
> like
> or
> others.
> Our current use cases are ratings in the financial sector and background
> information about scientific data in the life science domain that we might
> get from the Science Commons project.
> Tobias current job is to plug TriQL.P into Piggy bank so that we can
> showcase how users can switch between different trust policies and get
> explanations why they should trust the displayed data.
> So, I think general discussions are not very helpful at this point.
> I especially hate the discussion about the definition of trust, which is
> rather old and leads nowhere. What we do is information filtering using
> subjective policies.
>>When Chris visited us, he mentioned this work, but still I think it
>>would be good to start a conversation here in public so that everybody
>>can participate.
> Discussions about concrete use cases which arise from what you are doing
> with Semantic Bank are a different topic, if you meant this with your
> questions. But let's first get the demo working and see then where we can
> use it.
> Chris
>>Anyway, thanks very much for your interest.
Received on Thu Apr 14 2005 - 15:40:45 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Aug 09 2012 - 16:39:18 EDT