W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sweo-ig@w3.org > November 2006

Re: Semantic Web Layer Cake Update Suggestion

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 06:51:37 +0900
To: "Wilson, MD (Michael)" <m.d.wilson@rl.ac.uk>
Cc: jeff.pollock@oracle.com, "Kingsley Idehen" <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "W3C SWEO IG" <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20061130215207.F0EA94EFCD@homer.w3.org>

> Mostly, yes - how do we get the right story to bring about the CIO
> investment decision in SW technology?
> One of the selling points of the SW to CIOs is the argument that an
> investment in technology at any one layer (requiring those below it) can
> provide applications which give return on investment (ROI) that
> justifies the technology choice, and that the staff that have been
> trained for a layer will continue to be a justified investment when the
> layers above are adopted, since higher layers build on the skills of
> lower ones.
> The contrast for those who experienced the expert systems boom and bust
> of the 1980s, or the grand AI view is where massive investment in a full
> architecture with staff training and method adoption is required before
> any ROI.=20
> Since this is a positive argument for the SW it is worth checking
> whether any presentation of the SW appears to fight against it - and
> then avoid the conflict.

One conclusion we might draw from this idea: we should target
organizations that don't have XML expertise.  XML and RDF are different,
of course, but they are *close enough* that it's hard to justify
learning both.  In other words, make the point that you don't need to
know ANYTHING ABOUT XML in order to use Semantic Web technogies.

So maybe that's:

     Myth: RDF is based on XML

     Fact: No, RDF can use XML when it makes sense to do so, but RDF
           works very well without XML, and people can use Semantic Web
           technologies quite effectively without knowing anything about

(This obvious relates to Kingsley's issue with the traditional layer
cake, which shows RDF based on XML.)

Of course, let's not forget the flip side:

     Myth: RDF and XML are competing technologies

     Fact: Although users sometimes do have to make a choice between
           them, RDF and XML generally solve very different problems.
           Do spreadsheet programs and word processing programs compete?
           Yes, a user has to chose one or the other for a given task,
           but in general one is much better suited than the other, so
           there is little real competition.

   -- Sandro

Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 22:04:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:28:51 UTC