<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Scholar Citations and Metadata Quality</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/google-scholar-citations-and-metadata-quality/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/google-scholar-citations-and-metadata-quality/</link>
	<description>Reflections on the Web and Web 2.0</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 23:09:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Rusbridge</title>
		<link>http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/google-scholar-citations-and-metadata-quality/#comment-97988</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris Rusbridge]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8665#comment-97988</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Brian, you are making a big leap in the last paragraph, from mthe existence of errors in crowd-sourced data to the possible death of crowd-sourced services and the necessary success of authoritative ones. Surely the answer really is to build architectures that allow errors in crowd-sourced data to be identified and corrected by the crowd, in this case particularly by the &quot;owners&quot; of the data. Your collabgraph seems like one good way to do just that...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brian, you are making a big leap in the last paragraph, from mthe existence of errors in crowd-sourced data to the possible death of crowd-sourced services and the necessary success of authoritative ones. Surely the answer really is to build architectures that allow errors in crowd-sourced data to be identified and corrected by the crowd, in this case particularly by the &#8220;owners&#8221; of the data. Your collabgraph seems like one good way to do just that&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
