W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2009

Re: Dons flame resistant (3 hours) interface about Linked Data URIs

From: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:07:39 -0500
Message-ID: <a25ac1f0907100907o2a593f41h343ca7c30aea623a@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ian Emmons <iemmons@bbn.com>
Cc: semantic-web@w3c.org
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Ian Emmons<iemmons@bbn.com> wrote:
> On Jul 10, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Toby Inkster wrote:
>>
>> The URL of the file and the URL of the subject of discourse must differ
>> so that we can make unambiguous statements about each, and make
>> statements about the relationship between the two.
>
> If one takes the preceding statement as fact and then watches the video
> shared by Dan Brickley:
>
>     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4MwTvtyrUQ
>
> Then the only logical conclusion is that the SemWeb will never achieve
> widespread use.  If average folks can't distinguish between their browser
> and a search engine, how could we ever expect them to distinguish between
> the URI of the file and the URI of the subject of discourse?  The answer is
> that we can't.

But you're talking about 2 different audiences. Anyone writing
anything for the web (writing HTML, constructing URIs, building RDF)
has a different understanding of browser-vs-searchengine than the
average person on the street.

Understanding the difference between URIs of a file and the URI of the
subject of discourse is exactly the same concept portrayed in the
painting "The Treachery of Images". That's the famous one of a pipe
with the phrase "Ceci n'est pas une pipe" (This is not a pipe)[1].
Most people understand that an image of a pipe is not a pipe, so why
can't they understand that a webpage about a person is not a person?

> So either the SemWeb will have correct KR, logical, and
> ontological underpinnings, or lots of people will publish data, but not
> both.

It'll never be perfect, but I think there'll be enough overlap to make
things interesting and useful. Also, if raw data is useful enough,
then people tend to write ontologies, transformations, and other tools
to get it into a working space. Screen scrapers are a common example
of this phenomenon.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images

Regards,
Paul
Received on Friday, 10 July 2009 16:08:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:13 UTC