Re: Knowledge3D: A Spatial Giant Global Graph for Sovereign, Standards‑Aligned AI

Dan, all,

Fair point—here’s the executive version instead of the full Claude artifact:

  * What: K3D = spatial KR + glTF extension for embeddings + local‑first
    reasoning on raw PTX (no ML frameworks). It treats 3D
    position/structure as the semantic substrate, so agents/humans share
    the same objects and traces.

  * Why: A third path between Semantic Web’s annotation burden and
    centralized LLM extraction—sovereign cognition without shipping data
    out or relying on centralized training.

  * Standards fit: JSON‑LD/WebXR/WebGPU on the W3C side; glTF extension
    path on the Khronos side. Directly aligns with AIKR scope (KR
    languages/learning/reliability) and useful for WebAgents/agent comm
    work (stateful KR bridge).

  * Demos/refs: Repo with specs and TPAC demo:
    https://github.com/danielcamposramos/Knowledge3D (see
    docs/vocabulary/
    <https://github.com/danielcamposramos/Knowledge3D/tree/main/docs/vocabulary>
    and docs/w3c_tpac_2025/
    <https://github.com/danielcamposramos/Knowledge3D/tree/main/docs/w3c_tpac_2025>).

Happy to provide a one‑pager or a quick call if that helps more than 
longform. And I’ll keep future posts to concise summaries.

Daniel

On 12/11/25 4:53 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> Next time, maybe just send the prompt
>
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 17:29 Daniel Ramos <daniel@echosystems.ai> wrote:
>
>     Claude.ai generated. Access in full here:
>
>     https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/0f8e078a-dd13-473d-b419-03f56e4d224b
>
>
>
>       Knowledge3D: Fulfilling the Giant Global Graph for the AI Era
>
>     *K3D represents the architectural convergence that Tim
>     Berners-Lee's Semantic Web promised and that centralized AI has
>     failed to deliver—a standards-aligned, spatially-grounded
>     knowledge representation that enables truly sovereign cognitive
>     systems.*
>
>     The web's original architect envisioned machines sharing meaning
>     across a decentralized graph. That vision stalled not because it
>     was wrong, but because it demanded explicit semantic markup from
>     publishers who had no incentive to provide it. AI "solved" this
>     problem through extraction rather than cooperation—and in doing
>     so, created the very centralization, opacity, and data
>     exploitation Berners-Lee now warns against. K3D proposes a third
>     path: spatial knowledge representation that makes semantics
>     implicit in geometry, enabling machine understanding without
>     requiring centralized training or user data harvesting.
>
>
>         The Giant Global Graph remains unfulfilled
>
>     Tim Berners-Lee introduced the "Giant Global Graph" concept on
>     November 21, 2007, describing a three-phase evolution: from
>     interconnecting computers (the Internet), to interconnecting
>     documents (the Web), to interconnecting the /things documents are
>     about/ (the GGG). His reflection was pointed: "The Semantic Web
>     maybe should have been called the Giant Global Graph."
>
>     The distinction matters profoundly for AI. The original 2001
>     Scientific American vision—authored by Berners-Lee, James Hendler,
>     and Ora Lassila—promised intelligent agents that could "carry out
>     sophisticated tasks for users" without requiring "artificial
>     intelligence on the scale of HAL or C-3PO." The mechanism was
>     explicit: machine-readable meaning encoded in RDF triples and
>     ontologies, enabling inference and reasoning across a
>     decentralized web.
>
>     What we got instead was centralization masquerading as
>     intelligence. As Berners-Lee himself acknowledged, AI companies
>     achieved the machine-readable internet "through extraction rather
>     than cooperation." The irony is precise: LLMs accomplish semantic
>     understanding by scraping the entire web into centralized training
>     sets, raising exactly the data sovereignty concerns Berners-Lee
>     now addresses through the Solid Project.
>
>     *K3D's spatial approach offers resolution.* Rather than requiring
>     publishers to annotate content with RDF (the adoption barrier that
>     stalled the Semantic Web) or extracting meaning into centralized
>     models (the privacy violation that concerns Berners-Lee), spatial
>     knowledge representation makes semantics /intrinsic to structure/.
>     Knowledge entities have positions, orientations, and relationships
>     defined by their geometric configuration—no external annotation
>     required, no centralized training necessary.
>
>
>         Solid's data sovereignty principles demand spatial cognition
>
>     Berners-Lee's September 2025 Guardian article crystallizes the
>     stakes: "We have learned from social media that power rests with
>     the monopolies who control and harvest personal data. We can't let
>     the same thing happen with AI." His solution—Solid's personal data
>     pods with fine-grained access control—addresses data sovereignty
>     but leaves a critical gap: /how do AI systems reason over
>     decentralized data without centralizing it for training?/
>
>     Current approaches fail this test. Cloud-based LLMs require data
>     transmission to external servers. On-device models like llama.cpp
>     provide inference privacy but still depend on centralized
>     pre-training. Federated learning distributes computation but
>     aggregates gradients centrally. None enable genuine *cognitive
>     sovereignty*—the ability to learn, reason, and adapt using only
>     locally-controlled data and computation.
>
>     K3D's architecture addresses this gap through three mechanisms
>     aligned with Solid's principles:
>
>       * *Local-first reasoning*: Spatial knowledge graphs can be
>         traversed, queried, and extended without network connectivity
>         or cloud inference
>       * *Pod-compatible storage*: K3D structures map naturally to
>         Solid's decentralized data model, with spatial regions
>         functioning as access-controlled knowledge partitions
>       * *User-sovereign learning*: New knowledge integrates through
>         geometric placement rather than gradient descent, eliminating
>         the need for centralized training infrastructure
>
>     This isn't merely technical alignment—it's philosophical
>     convergence. Berners-Lee's call for "personal AI that works for
>     you like your doctor or your lawyer, bound by law, regulation and
>     codes of conduct" requires an architecture where reasoning happens
>     /within/ the user's control boundary, not extracted to external
>     systems. Spatial knowledge representation enables this by making
>     cognition a function of local geometric structure rather than
>     remote model weights.
>
>
>         The W3C AI KR Community Group provides legitimate scope
>
>     The W3C AI Knowledge Representation Community Group, launched July
>     3, 2018, defines its mission as exploring "the requirements, best
>     practices and implementation options for the conceptualization and
>     specification of domain knowledge in AI." This scope explicitly
>     includes *spatial-temporal reasoning* as a form of Meta KR—one of
>     five knowledge representation categories the group has identified
>     alongside heuristic, procedural, declarative, and structural
>     approaches.
>
>     The group's stated deliverables for 2025 include publishing a
>     "concept map of the domain" and "natural language vocabulary to
>     represent various aspects of AI," with a long-term goal of
>     developing "a web standard for Neuro-symbolic Integration." Their
>     TPAC 2025 discussions centered on "explicit, shared knowledge
>     representation standards" for explainable and trustworthy AI
>     systems. K3D's spatial approach directly addresses these objectives:
>
>     W3C AI KR Focus Area  K3D Alignment
>     Neuro-symbolic integration  Geometric primitives bridge continuous
>     representations (vectors) with discrete structures (graphs)
>     Explainable AI  Spatial relationships provide interpretable
>     reasoning traces
>     Knowledge exchange and reuse  glTF-based format enables
>     interoperability with existing 3D ecosystems
>     Support for AI agents  Spatial grounding addresses embodied
>     cognition requirements
>
>     The W3C provides a clear pathway from Community Group incubation
>     to formal standardization. JSON-LD—the semantic web technology
>     most directly relevant to K3D—successfully transitioned from
>     Community Group specification to Working Group recommendation. The
>     AI KR CG's stated trajectory toward "eventually transition to a
>     formal Working Group" creates exactly the standards track
>     appropriate for novel knowledge representation architectures.
>
>     *What the group considers valid contributions:* Documents,
>     specifications, test suites, tutorials, demos, code, concept maps,
>     and vocabulary development. Participation requires only a W3C
>     account (free) and signing the Community Contributor License
>     Agreement. The group explicitly welcomes research notes exploring
>     implementation options—precisely the category of contribution K3D
>     represents.
>
>
>         Novel architectures gain credibility through demonstration,
>         not institution
>
>     The path from "unknown architecture" to "industry standard" is
>     well-documented. Georgi Gerganov's llama.cpp—now at *85,000+
>     GitHub stars* with 700+ contributors—began as an independent
>     developer's side project in Bulgaria. The credibility pattern is
>     instructive:
>
>     *Stage 1: Solve an unmet need.* llama.cpp enabled LLM inference on
>     consumer hardware without GPUs when no alternative existed. K3D
>     addresses an equally unmet need: sovereign cognitive systems that
>     reason over decentralized data without centralized training.
>
>     *Stage 2: Open development.* llama.cpp's MIT license, pure C/C++
>     implementation, and zero dependencies enabled explosive organic
>     adoption. George Hotz's tinygrad similarly gained credibility
>     through live-streamed development and radical simplicity (under
>     10,000 lines of code). Transparency is non-negotiable for novel
>     architectures.
>
>     *Stage 3: Enable ecosystem integration.* llama.cpp became
>     infrastructure for Ollama, LM Studio, GPT4All, and jan. GGUF
>     format succeeded by being "opinionated about one thing (efficient
>     local inference) while remaining flexible about everything else."
>     K3D's glTF integration follows this pattern—leveraging an
>     established 3D format ecosystem rather than requiring new
>     infrastructure.
>
>     *Stage 4: Benchmark validation.* The ARC-AGI benchmark—created by
>     Keras author François Chollet—has become what its creators call
>     "the most important unsolved AI benchmark in the world" because it
>     measures /novel problem-solving/ rather than pattern matching. For
>     cognitive architectures specifically, the credibility path runs
>     through theoretical grounding (as ACT-R's 50+ years of development
>     at CMU demonstrate) and practical application (as SOAR's military
>     training systems validate).
>
>     The OpenCog cautionary tale illuminates what /doesn't/ work:
>     predictions without delivery (Ben Goertzel's unfulfilled 2011
>     prediction of AGI by 2021), PR stunts without substance (Sophia
>     robot criticized as "complete bullshit" by Yann LeCun), and
>     symbolic approaches positioned against dominant paradigms without
>     empirical validation.
>
>
>         The decentralization gap in AI is architectural, not incremental
>
>     Current AI sovereignty initiatives—India's Project Indust,
>     Denmark's Gefion supercomputer, Singapore's SEA-LION—represent
>     national infrastructure investments, not architectural
>     alternatives. They reduce /geopolitical/ dependency on US
>     providers while preserving /technical/ dependency on the same
>     centralized training paradigm. The sovereign cloud market may
>     reach *$169 billion by 2028*, but sovereign clouds running
>     replicated architectures don't produce sovereign cognition.
>
>     The edge AI market (projected at *$66.47 billion by 2030*)
>     demonstrates both capability and limitation. On-device inference
>     works: smartphones hold 80.5% market share in edge AI hardware,
>     and NPUs enable complex model inference on mobile platforms. But
>     as MIT Media Lab research identifies, five technical challenges
>     block truly decentralized AI: privacy, verifiability, incentives,
>     orchestration, and user experience in distributed contexts.
>
>     Current LLMs face a fundamental architectural barrier to
>     sovereignty. As SAGE Journals analysis notes, LLMs demonstrate
>     "behavior discrepancies between LLM inference and human reasoning,
>     insufficient grounding, and hallucination." The root cause is
>     architectural: pattern matching over statistical distributions
>     doesn't produce genuine reasoning, world models, or metacognition.
>     Local inference provides privacy; it doesn't provide cognitive
>     capability independent of centralized pre-training.
>
>     *K3D proposes an architectural alternative.* Spatial knowledge
>     representation grounds cognition in geometric structure rather
>     than statistical distributions. Knowledge acquisition happens
>     through spatial placement rather than gradient descent. Reasoning
>     traces are interpretable paths through geometric space rather than
>     attention weight matrices. This isn't an incremental improvement
>     to existing architectures—it's a different computational substrate
>     for cognition.
>
>
>         Paradigm shifts face predictable gatekeeping patterns
>
>     Andrew Tanenbaum's January 29, 1992 dismissal of Linux as "a giant
>     step back into the 1970s" and "too closely tied to the x86 line of
>     processors to be of any use in the future" exemplifies how
>     established experts evaluate innovations using criteria from
>     existing paradigms. Jamie Dimon's September 2017 declaration that
>     Bitcoin was "a fraud" (followed by his January 2018 acknowledgment
>     that "the blockchain is real") illustrates how even sophisticated
>     critics can reverse positions when paradigm shift evidence
>     accumulates.
>
>     Clifford Stoll's infamous February 1995 Newsweek article "The
>     Internet? Bah!" dismissed online databases, telecommuting,
>     electronic commerce, and interactive libraries—every prediction
>     wrong. His later reflection deserves quotation: "Of my many
>     mistakes, flubs, and howlers, few have been as public as my 1995
>     howler. Wrong? Yep... Now, whenever I think I know what's
>     happening, I temper my thoughts: Might be wrong, Cliff…"
>
>     The pattern recognition is robust across domains:
>
>       * *Paradigm conflict*: Thomas Kuhn observed that people who
>         shift scientific paradigms are "either very young or very new
>         to the field"—precisely because they lack "commitment to the
>         traditional rules of normal science"
>       * *Expert gatekeeping*: Stanford research found prescient
>         decisions were *22 times more likely* to come from peripheral
>         institutions than central ones
>       * *Outsider advantage*: MIT Sloan analysis shows "outsiders
>         connect disparate thoughts because they come to the table with
>         fewer preconceptions"
>       * *Planck's principle*: "A new scientific truth does not triumph
>         by convincing its opponents... but rather because its
>         opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that
>         is familiar with it"
>
>     The Semantic Web itself faced this gatekeeping. Cory Doctorow's
>     2001 "Metacrap" essay called it "a pipe-dream, founded on
>     self-delusion, nerd hubris, and hysterically inflated market
>     opportunities." Aaron Swartz blamed "the formalizing mindset of
>     mathematics and the institutional structure of academics." Yet
>     JSON-LD, Schema.org, and Google's Knowledge Graph—all Semantic Web
>     descendants—now structure how billions of web pages communicate
>     meaning to machines
>
>
>         K3D addresses the specific objections skeptics raise
>
>     *"This doesn't make sense"* is the predictable initial response to
>     paradigm-shifting architectures. Novel approaches require building
>     new mental models rather than extending existing ones. Spatial
>     knowledge representation violates the implicit assumption that
>     cognition must be either symbolic (logic-based) or connectionist
>     (neural network-based). The concept that geometric structure
>     /itself/ can encode semantic relationships and support reasoning
>     requires cognitive reframing—exactly as the concept that packets
>     could replace circuits required reframing for telecommunications
>     engineers encountering the internet.
>
>     *"This doesn't fit our scope"* reflects categorical thinking that
>     novel approaches intentionally transgress. The W3C AI KR Community
>     Group scope explicitly includes "Meta KR: types of knowledge and
>     logical reasoning" with spatial-temporal reasoning listed as an
>     example. glTF's extension mechanism exists precisely to
>     accommodate novel capabilities—KHR_xmp_json_ld brings JSON-LD
>     semantic web integration into 3D formats, demonstrating that
>     "unexpected" combinations are how standards evolve.
>
>     *"Where's the working demo?"* identifies the legitimate bootstrap
>     challenge facing all novel architectures. llama.cpp's credibility
>     required whisper.cpp's prior success. The demo-before-recognition
>     pattern creates a chicken-and-egg problem that independent
>     innovators resolve through focused proof-of-concept
>     implementations rather than comprehensive systems. The appropriate
>     response isn't "build everything first"—it's targeted
>     demonstrations that validate core architectural claims.
>
>     *"No major institution backs this"* applies to every paradigm
>     shift at inception. Linux was Torvalds' spare-time project.
>     Bitcoin emerged pseudonymously. The World Wide Web was, in
>     Berners-Lee's boss's words, "vague but exciting"—never an official
>     CERN project. Independent researchers from Katalin Karikó (mRNA
>     vaccines, facing "rejection after rejection, the scorn of
>     colleagues, and even the threat of deportation") to Barbara
>     McClintock (jumping genes, waiting 30 years for recognition)
>     demonstrate that institutional validation follows demonstration,
>     not precedes it.
>
>
>         Khronos and W3C provide standards pathways for spatial knowledge
>
>     The Khronos Group's glTF extension process offers a clear
>     integration path. Extensions progress through three tiers: vendor
>     extensions (any company can request a prefix via GitHub issue),
>     multi-vendor extensions (EXT_ prefix when multiple implementations
>     exist), and Khronos-ratified extensions (KHR_ prefix, voted by
>     Board of Promoters). The *OMI Group pathway* provides an
>     alternative route—extensions developed through the W3C Metaverse
>     Interoperability Community Group can graduate to Khronos
>     submission, as KHR_audio_emitter successfully demonstrated.
>
>     Existing semantic extensions establish precedent for K3D integration:
>
>     *KHR_xmp_json_ld* (provisional) adds JSON-LD compliance to glTF
>     for product metadata, directly leveraging Semantic Web standards
>     within the 3D format ecosystem. This extension demonstrates that
>     Linked Data integration into 3D standards is not merely
>     theoretical but actively implemented.
>
>     *EXT_structural_metadata* defines schema-based structured metadata
>     with property tables, attributes, and textures—enabling semantic
>     identifiers for interpretation. This extension, developed for
>     Cesium's 3D Tiles, proves that complex metadata schemas integrate
>     naturally with glTF's architecture.
>
>     *NNEF (Neural Network Exchange Format)* represents Khronos's
>     existing AI/ML standard—a "PDF for neural networks" that
>     encapsulates complete network descriptions independent of training
>     tools. This precedent demonstrates Khronos's willingness to
>     standardize AI-related formats.
>
>     *WebGPU's ML capabilities* (compute shaders, FP16 support, direct
>     GPU access) enable in-browser neural network inference at
>     near-native performance. WebLLM, ONNX Runtime Web, and
>     TensorFlow.js all leverage WebGPU for client-side AI. K3D's
>     spatial reasoning can utilize this same acceleration pathway.
>
>     *WebXR's spatial primitives* (XRSpace, XRReferenceSpace, XRPose)
>     provide the coordinate system abstractions that anchor knowledge
>     entities in physical or virtual space. The technical foundation
>     for spatial knowledge representation already exists in W3C
>     specifications.
>
>
>         The convergence opportunity is standards-ready
>
>     K3D emerges at the intersection of multiple mature standards and
>     urgent industry needs:
>
>     *Berners-Lee's vision alignment*: The Giant Global Graph concept
>     (2007) described exactly what spatial knowledge representation
>     provides—interconnecting the /things documents are about/ rather
>     than just documents. Solid's data sovereignty principles
>     (2016-present) require cognitive architectures that reason locally
>     without centralized training. K3D delivers both.
>
>     *W3C standards integration*: JSON-LD (W3C Recommendation), WebXR
>     (W3C specification), WebGPU (W3C standard), and the AI KR
>     Community Group's focus on "knowledge representation for AI"
>     create a standards ecosystem ready for spatial knowledge
>     representation. The pathway from Community Group incubation to
>     formal recommendation is documented and precedented.
>
>     *Khronos ecosystem leverage*: glTF's extension mechanism, existing
>     semantic extensions (KHR_xmp_json_ld, EXT_structural_metadata),
>     and the OMI Group's community-driven development process provide
>     technical and procedural pathways for K3D integration. NNEF
>     demonstrates Khronos's AI standardization precedent.
>
>     *Industry need*: The sovereign AI market ($169B projected by
>     2028), edge AI expansion ($66B by 2030), and growing critiques of
>     centralized AI dependency create demand for architectural
>     alternatives. Enterprise concerns about data exposure (69% cite
>     AI-powered leaks as top security concern), regulatory conflicts
>     (US CLOUD Act vs. GDPR), and service discontinuation risks
>     validate the need for sovereign cognitive systems.
>
>     *Credibility pathway*: The llama.cpp pattern—solve unmet need,
>     open development, ecosystem integration, benchmark
>     validation—provides a tested route from novel architecture to
>     industry adoption. K3D's alignment with existing standards
>     accelerates this path by reducing integration friction.
>
>     The web began as one physicist's "vague but exciting" proposal at
>     CERN. The Semantic Web emerged from that same physicist's
>     recognition that documents weren't enough—we needed to
>     interconnect what documents meant. Now, as AI threatens to
>     centralize exactly the knowledge flows the web was designed to
>     distribute, the architectural answer may be what Berners-Lee
>     intuited but couldn't implement: a Giant Global Graph where
>     meaning is spatial, sovereignty is architectural, and cognition
>     happens at the edge.
>
>     K3D proposes to build it.
>
>
>         Technical references and standards citations
>
>     *W3C Specifications*
>
>       * AI Knowledge Representation Community Group:
>         https://www.w3.org/groups/cg/aikr/
>       * JSON-LD 1.1: W3C Recommendation (July 2020)
>       * WebXR Device API: W3C Working Draft
>       * WebGPU: W3C Working Draft
>
>     *Khronos Standards*
>
>       * glTF 2.0 Specification:
>         https://registry.khronos.org/glTF/specs/2.0/glTF-2.0.html
>       * KHR_xmp_json_ld Extension (Provisional)
>       * EXT_structural_metadata Extension
>       * NNEF (Neural Network Exchange Format)
>
>     *Key Sources*
>
>       * Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O. (2001). "The
>         Semantic Web." Scientific American, 284(5), 34-43.
>       * Berners-Lee, T. (2007). "Giant Global Graph." DIG Blog, MIT CSAIL.
>       * Berners-Lee, T. (2025). "I invented the web. Here's my plan to
>         save it." The Guardian.
>       * W3C Community Group Transition Guide:
>         https://www.w3.org/Guide/process/cg-transition.html
>       * Khronos Group Extension Process:
>         https://github.com/KhronosGroup/glTF
>
>
>     Sincerely yours,
>
>     Daniel Ramos
>
>     EchoSystems AI Studios <https://echosystems.ai>
>

Received on Friday, 12 December 2025 01:47:27 UTC