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

Re: More On the Semantic Web (or: is RDF any good?)

From: Sankar Virdhagriswaran <sv@hunchuen.crystaliz.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 13:33:52 -0500
Message-ID: <00a801c04820$1cc8aa00$4975ef8c@crystaliz.com>
To: "Matt Jensen" <mattj@newsblip.com>, "Gordon Joly" <gordo@dircon.co.uk>
Cc: "Craig Pugsley" <craig.pugsley@mimesweeper.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, <semantic-web@w3.org>

> it can claim.  If you're looking for a Semantic Web that can give you
> "truth", we've got a long wait.  If you're looking for something that
> improves search results through related concepts and simple inferences, in
> a few years you should be able to get something that's useful, but not
> perfect.
>
>


Hear, hear!

Received on Monday, 6 November 2000 13:31:04 GMT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Matt Jensen: "RE: More On the Semantic Web (or: is RDF any good?)"
Previous message: William Loughborough: "RE: More On the Semantic Web (or: is RDF any good?)"
In reply to: Matt Jensen: "RE: More On the Semantic Web (or: is RDF any good?)"
Next in thread: Sean B. Palmer: "Re: More On the Semantic Web (or: is RDF any good?)"

Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]
Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Help: [ How to use the archives ] [ Search in the archives ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 23 April 2007 18:19:43 GMT