Re: Semantic Web Interest Group now closed

> On 18 Oct 2018, at 21:29, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> What about the sentient web, which blends the web of symbol knowledge with computational statistics?   The traditional logic & proof mindset will give way to new approaches that are better suited to machine learning and rational belief in a world of uncertain, incomplete and inconsistent knowledge.

Inconsistency is covered again with notions such as hyperintensionality. See
the very interesting recent article
"Impossible Worlds and the Logic of Imagination"
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10670-017-9875-5 <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10670-017-9875-5>

I don't really think that these considerations warrant changing the name 
of "semantic web" to something else. But they could help move us from 
thinking of the semantic web in a new light. :-)

Henry


> 
>> On 18 Oct 2018, at 18:46, Martin McEvoy <martin@weborganics.co.uk <mailto:martin@weborganics.co.uk>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hyperdata is actually much more appropriate in today's modern landscape.
>> 
>> Best wishes
>> Martin
>> 
>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, 15:43 Henry Story, <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 18 Oct 2018, at 16:23, Nicolas Chauvat <nicolas.chauvat@logilab.fr <mailto:nicolas.chauvat@logilab.fr>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 02:32:29PM +0200, Frans Knibbe wrote:
>>>> To me, the term 'machine-readable web' excludes an important target group:
>>>> us humans (assuming all current list subscribers are human). When I try
>>>> explain the concepts of Linked Data or the Semantic Web to an uninitiated I
>>>> like to use the terms 'web of data' or even shorter 'data web'. For some
>>>> more finesse the term 'the web of self-explanatory data', could be
>>>> considered, but I think just putting the terms 'web' and 'data' together
>>>> sets the tone well enough.
>>>> Also, a term like 'data web' is happily free of technicalities.
>>> 
>>> +10
>> 
>> I like the word hyper-data, as it helps both
>> 1) show the continuity it has with hyper-text
>> 2) has a fascinating relation to what is know as hyper-systems as
>> described 
>>    Rutten, J. J. (2000). Universal coalgebra: a theory of systems. 
>>    Theoretical computer science, 249(1), 3-80.
>>   http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.159.2020&rep=rep1&type=pdf <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.159.2020&rep=rep1&type=pdf>
>> 
>> which is a function of the form S -> 2^2^S
>> 
>> ie one that takes you from a state to a set of sets of such states. Sets of states are
>> often thought of as propositions, and sets of sets of those sounds like quad stores.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> perhaps even a corner stone like RDF might be replaced by something that is
>>>> considered better in the future?
>>> 
>>> I heard of https://ipfs.io/ <https://ipfs.io/> lately.
>> 
>> IPFS is a protocol, so in the realm of coalgebras, whereas RDF is a data format and
>> so in the realm of algebras. Both are orthogonal, and defined in dual categories.
>> RDF is defined in terms of IRIs and so could easily describe states on a IPFS System, 
>> just as it can on an HTTPS one.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Nicolas Chauvat
>>> 
>>> logilab.fr <http://logilab.fr/> - services en informatique scientifique et gestion de connaissances  
>>> 
>> 
> 
> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org <mailto:dsr@w3.org>> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett <http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett>
> W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>