W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2010

Re: Any reason for ontology reuse?

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 21:47:35 -0500
Cc: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Martijn van der Plaat <martijn@profec.nl>, Percy Enrique Rivera Salas <privera.salas@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com>
Message-Id: <C94AAE1D-2A9C-4475-8017-5A9EF2C33A13@w3.org>
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>

On 2010-12 -08, at 04:35, Martin Hepp wrote:

> In general, I think that the Semantic Web must use a decentralized approach for the definition and adoption of conceptual elements, same as the Web uses decentralized, fault-tolerant approaches as a fundamental principle. So calling for standardization bodies to maintain "authoritative" vocabularies will not work at Web Scale, IMO. At least, standards bodies may be to slow to provide ontologies and ontology updates (INCOTERMS, for instance, updates it's definition of trade terms only once per decade)

You need a blend of a few global authoritative ontologies and a lot of grass-roots ones
and everything in between, in a scale fee way.

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Fractal

The Fractal Nature of the Semantic Web
http://dig.csail.mit.edu/2007/Papers/AIMagazine/fractal-paper.pdf

Tim
Received on Thursday, 9 December 2010 02:49:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:40 GMT