W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > November 2005

Re: Options we have with respect to the draft charters (i.e., RE: [fwd] Draft charters for work on Semantics for WS)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 15:57:23 +0000
Message-ID: <4381EE63.2080503@w3.org>
To: drew.mcdermott@yale.edu
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org

Drew McDermott wrote:

>>BTW, why is it said that "the current WSDL standard operates at the
>>syntactic level"?  What is any more semantic about the things that
>>are labelled "semantic"?
>By old and well established usage, "semantic" means "complex,
>expressive, insightful, ours," contrasted with "syntactic," which
>means "simple, weak, error-prone, theirs."
>It would be nice to avoid this term completely, but then we'd have to
>change the name "Semantic Web."
Heh, I'm sympathetic... We could always go back to talking about a 
'Resource Description Framework', ie a framework for describing ... 
things. But too late there I think; although the original idea was an 
incrementally extended framework,  most folks now see RDF==triples, too 
limiting a concept to be the overall umbrella term for this effort.


Received on Monday, 21 November 2005 15:57:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:15 UTC