W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2008

Re: objects to facts to links to LOD to ???

From: Knud Hinnerk Möller <knud.moeller@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:02:48 +0000
Cc: (wrong string) ā¤°ā¤ĩā¤ŋā¤‚ā¤Ļā¤° ā¤ ā¤žā¤•āĨā¤° (ravinder thakur)" <ravinderthakur@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
Message-Id: <7EDE3F04-A068-40EA-AAEC-775F130B43A8@deri.org>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>


On 16.12.2008, at 17:27, Kingsley Idehen wrote:

> Knud et al,
>
> I think Ravinder has started the process of fixing the current  
> Semantic Web layer cake :-) Which is a very good thing (imho, but  
> not seeking a Layer Cake discussion explosion).

I'd rather say his proposal (objects->facts->links->...) is  
complementary to the current SW layer cake. It shows what is going on  
conceptually, whereas the current SW cake (which I agree probably  
needs to be fixed) is more of a technology stack. An interesting paper  
I read related to this is:

A. Gerber, A. van der Merwe, and A. Barnard. A functional Semantic Web  
architecture. In Proceedings of the 5th European Semantic Web  
Conference (ESWC2008), Tenerife, Spain, pages 273–287. Springer, June  
2008.

> The tricky part is the interchangeable nature of "Discovery" and  
> "Trust" in any such scheme layer-wise. For instance, do "Discovery"  
> and "Trust" occupy Layers 4, 5 or either ? We ultimately want to  
> reason against trusted data sources, but the serendipity quotient of  
> discovery is a key factor re. the dynamic nature of "trusted sources".
>
> Since I am clearly thinking and writing (aloud) at the same time, I  
> would suggest:
>
> Layer 4 - Discovery (with high Serendipity Quotient)
> Layer 5 - Trust (albeit inherently volatile)
>
> Kingsley
>>

I'm not sure discovery and trust belong in this stack at all. Not that  
I don't think they are extremely important, but what I see in  
Ravinder's stack is a description of the nature of data on the SW. Of  
course, what I see might not be what he intended! :) The next layer  
should describe how the data is different from the previous layers. As  
I pointed out in a previous mail, I think this difference could be in  
inferenced data vs. explicit data.

Cheers,
Knud
-------------------------------------------------
Knud Möller, MA
+353 - 91 - 495086
Smile Group: http://smile.deri.ie
Digital Enterprise Research Institute
   National University of Ireland, Galway
Institiúid Taighde na Fiontraíochta Digití
   Ollscoil na hÉireann, Gaillimh
Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2008 18:03:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:26 GMT