W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2000

Re: XML.com 'Semantic Web: A Primer' article (the SW and you ;-)

From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@swartzfam.com>
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 23:06:24 -0600
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
CC: RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B62A46F0.1C1AE%aswartz@swartzfam.com>
Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org> wrote:

> I think it is important to have some discussion here on
> 'Semantic Web' since for many of us there is a larger goal, towards which
> RDF as-we-now-know-it is just a means to an end. If we're going to get to
> the Semantic Web (for some interpretation of that phrase), I know a lot
> of the work of getting there will be done participants (and lurkers) on
> this mailing list.

I'd like to see the return of the semantic-web list. I see it like this:

rdf-interest for comments of RDF and related specs
rdf-logic    for highly technical discussions about ontologies, etc.
semantic-web for high-level thoughts about the future of the Web

Personally, I'm most interested in the third. I'd also like to see some
direction from the W3C on this front. It's really too bad that XML.com has
to step in to try and explain this. (I'm giving the W3C until the end of the
month until I start complaining. ;-))

Also, I was disappointed that Edd's article (like the rdf-logic list) merged
the theory and implementation of the Semantic Web. RDF is simply a means to
an end. It may be the course currently being pursued by the W3C, but that
doesn't mean it's the only one.

I'd really like to see some Semantic Web applications, and suggestions for
them. (Dan: Where are TBL's suggestions? I can't seem to find the link.) If
all goes while, I'm going to attempt to build a very simple one tomorrow.
(I'll announce it to the list when I'm done.)

-- 
[ Aaron Swartz | me@aaronsw.com | http://www.aaronsw.com ]
Received on Sunday, 5 November 2000 00:06:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:46 GMT