- From: Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 02:57:32 -0300
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@miscoranda.com>
- Cc: W3C Semantic Web IG <semantic-web@w3.org>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>, public-lod@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAOLUXBue6dBy5nCX+k3Gg0k_7yNeTio34Y1at3V2doeQ96G-kw@mail.gmail.com>
Open and decentralized system: could P2P do the trick? (raw from a draft I'm working on) 'P2P Metamodel integration. Peers (OSGi containers). DHTs (hash discovery of models and resources). Scopes. Advertisements. Camel network bindings (routes). Distributed dataflow activation graphs: inputs: Resource Observable T, models, outputs: Resource Observable T. Models : Function input, output: aggregate, compose, alignment, etc. 'discovered', resolved and applied from context (input) on each layer metamodel. Declarative models / trained models 'portable' (distributed, discoverable) across peers.' See the whole document I'm attaching for context. Regards, Sebastián. On Oct 11, 2017 8:12 AM, "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@miscoranda.com> wrote: > I was curious as to what was going on with the Semantic Web these > days: where did it go, who's using it, who's talking about it? As > usual I decided to chat about it in the Semantic Web Interest Group > channel #swig on Freenode, but since there is no logger there I > scraped the log out of my IRC client and am posting it here. > > In case you don't want to wade through the waffle, the summary is that > there were roughly four phases of Semantic Web development starting > with the eponymous golden age: Semantic Web (2001-2005), Linked Data > (2006-2010), JSON-LD (2010-2014), and now the Data Activity (2015-). > The biggest tangible results are Schema.org in conjunction with > JSON-LD for SEO, Dbpedia, a few tacky database products, and very > loosely the API economy. > > The only work that I could find still taking place on the Semantic Web > is under the W3C's Data Activity, which is very quiet and of limited > scope. On the other hand, the conceptual legacy of the Semantic Web is > still quite strong, and I make some notes on that in the log. As I > say, the Semantic Web was originally the conception of graphs instead > of trees, with global symbols, published in an open and decentralised > system. > > The main problem seems not to have been the proliferation of the > Semantic junk such as RDF/XML and SPARQL, as is sometimes argued > (references below), but rather that the Web side did not provide an > open and decentralised system in which to host the Semantic side. > Ongoing efforts are being made to rectify that, but there are no > promising solutions in that domain and so many of the Semantic Web > ideas will remain dormant. > > <sbp> looking at how active Semantic Web stuff is now, out of curiosity > <sbp> it seems that http://planetrdf.com/ is just a CFP spam site now > <sbp> there is some activity on https://www.w3.org/wiki/ > Special:RecentChanges > <sbp> none of the recent stuff seems to be SW related though > <selckin> some people refuse to give up > <sbp> let's try > https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/index.php?title=Special: > RecentChanges&days=365&from= > <sbp> selckin: who? > <sbp> only a few edits to this over the past year > <sbp> mostly on https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/ShEx it seems > <sbp> appears to be some sort of not very good schema thing, though > ericP did make one of the implementations > <sbp> the http://answers.semanticweb.com/ site that the IG page links > to doesn't even respond > <sbp> and https://www.w3.org/2007/11/Talks/search/query%3fdate=All+ > past+and+future+talks&%3bactivity=Semantic+Web&%3bsortInverse=yes > is a "Discontinued service" > <sbp> the CG page at https://www.w3.org/2001/sw/CG/wiki/ asks for log in > <sbp> the RDFa WG is listed as active but according to > https://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/ it was closed in 2015 > <sbp> same with the RDF WG but > https://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/wiki/Main_Page says that was closed in > 2014 > <sbp> the LDP WG closed in 2014 too, https://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/ > wiki/Main_Page > <sbp> ah, an explanation: "A few days ago W3C started a new activity, > called Data Activity, that also subsumes the (by now old) Semantic Web > Activity." — https://www.w3.org/blog/SW/ > <sbp> strange that the SW page itself doesn't explain that > <sbp> heh, dsr is the lead. well how about that > <sbp> they have a "Dataset Exchange Working Group", > https://www.w3.org/2017/dxwg/wiki/Main_Page > <sbp> trying to work out what this is > <sbp> they were working on DCAT, but that was RECed in 2014: > https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/ > <sbp> oh I see. it goes dc > dct > dcat > <sbp> then there's https://w3c.github.io/poe/vocab/ which is a rights > policy thing > <sbp> I dunno if the W3C should be working on anything rights related > these days. they seem to abrogate their responsibilities to society as > hard as they can > <sbp> there's also https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/ucr/ which says that > DCAT has some shortcomings they want to address. that's been three > years in the making then... > <sbp> (uses ReSpec. "ReSpec is a document production toolchain, with a > notable focus on W3C specifications.") > <sbp> there's also the POE WG, which is actually doing the rights > thing rather than DX WG: https://www.w3.org/2016/poe/wiki/Main_Page > (see above) > <sbp> SD WG are working on spatial data: > https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Main_Page > <sbp> ah, and the Data Shapes WG seems to be covering the ShEx thing I > found above: https://www.w3.org/2014/data-shapes/wiki/Main_Page > <sbp> seems to have been active, with Sandro no less, up to 2017: > https://www.w3.org/2017/05/31-shapes-minutes.html > <sbp> shame really; I thought Sandro would continue to go on to do > more interesting things > <sbp> it's like when you see tech stars from the 1980s and they're on > twitter moaning about Trump > <sbp> and then others are writing lisp machine hardware verified in > Coq or something > <sbp> heh, https://www.w3.org/2013/dwbp/wiki/Main_Page is said to be > active but was closed this year > <sbp> aand the Data Activity blog hasn't been updated since 2015: > https://www.w3.org/blog/data/ > <sbp> .t https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3078751 > <yoleaux> sbp: Sorry, I don't know what timezone that is. If in doubt, > see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tz_database_time_zones for a > list of options. > <sbp> what > <sbp> .title https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3078751 > <yoleaux> 403 - Forbidden Access to The Digital Library > <sbp> "hat Happened To The Semantic Web?" > <sbp> no PDF of the paper that I can find, but slides: > https://ht.acm.org/ht2017/images/MikaPeterACM%20Hypertext%202017- > WhatHappenedSemanticWeb.pdf > <sbp> says that 2001-2004 was the golden age > <sbp> then 2006 introduced Linked Data > <sbp> ah, there we go: "Current status (2017)" > <sbp> reduced standardisation (not kidding), narrower research focus > (is there ANY research?), and maturing technology > <sbp> the technology is Neo4j, Virtuoso, and Allegrograph. plus Oracle > and Microsoft stuff that I won't even bother to mention > <sbp> says that a big problem was that ontologies were centralised > (sigh), and data held privately (well, we should have seen that one > coming). also, no use of Linked Data because of trust issues! what > happened to the crypto that I helped timbl add to CWM then, eh? eh? > <sbp> mentions FOAF eventually > <sbp> quietly mentions the fact that the web has changed, data silos, all > that > <sbp> "Some useful data", cites schema.org, dbpedia, and wikidata > <sbp> not exactly a competitor to WolframAlpha though is it? > <sbp> funny, really. again one centralised site is the leader in a > space that should have been covered by Semantic Web technologies. > actually that would have been a really nice thing to push for. > probably still would be, though I tend to want my local computer to be > able to do those sorts of calculations > <sbp> like the other day I wanted to compute the prime factors of a > number. didn't really have anything lying around that does it in the > stdlib, so eventually I downloaded sage. but that's 4 GB of stuff! > you'd think we'd be able to get batteries included standard library > balances right by now > <sbp> .title https://www.quora.com/As-of-2015-is-the-semantic-web-dead > <yoleaux> As of 2015, is the semantic web dead? - Quora > <sbp> heh, hadn't seen http://5stardata.info/en/ before > <sbp> Alan Morrison answers: "The thing about the semantic web idea is > that the development cycle has turned out to be the opposite of what > Tim Berners-Lee anticipated in the early 1990s. With the semantic web > concept, TBL hoped for a giant structured open web. What we got first > was a bunch of closed structured webs and a mixed web that still isn’t > very well structured." > <sbp> it's not like open things can't work. Wikipedia is a good > example of that, despite the deletionism > <sbp> Shidan Gouran: "Definitely RDF/XML is dead as a data exchange > format, and soon, XML will become obsolete as well, which is a good > thing." > <sbp> I haven't seen anything XML based in years, except I guess for > the continued use of SVG > <sbp> on the other hand > https://kidehen.blogspot.com/2015/09/what-happened-to-semantic-web.html > argues that the SW achieved what it set out to do, just somewhat > quietly > <sbp> it seems to base that conclusion on schema.org alone > <sbp> .title https://medium.com/@dennybritz/the-semantic-web- > is-dead-long-live-the-semantic-web-eddbca0a8b6 > <yoleaux> The Semantic Web is dead. Long live the Semantic Web. > <sbp> "But let’s stop arguing over details and terminology. Let’s > forget about RDF, SPARQL, OWL, triple stores and quad stores for a > moment. Instead, let’s take a step back and look at the high-level > goal of the Semantic Web." > <sbp> yeah, well, it did get lost in those details > <sbp> kinda hard to ignore that > <sbp> "If you are a developer you may be able to query APIs or write a > custom scraper to get the data you need, and then write code to > aggregate them into something meaningful. But in many cases even that > wouldn’t be feasible due to technical, legal or time constraints." > <sbp> basically argues that the contemporary web didn't learn from the > Semantic Web at all > <sbp> also asks: "Did the API Economy succeed where the Semantic Web > failed?" > <sbp> I find the API economy such a pain in the arse. I tend to write > scrapers instead, because I find that those are usually more stable > than the APIs. it's ridiculous how often I have signed up for a key, > used a JSONic API, only to find that either the key issuing process > changes and I have to sign up for a new one, or the API breaks in any > of a myriad unfathomable ways > <sbp> "Technologies like JSON-LD may change this." > <sbp> I have never seen any JSON-LD > <sbp> three years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8510401 > <sbp> "JSON-LD, which is a profound improvement on and compatible with > the original RDF, is the only web metadata standard with a viable > future." > <sbp> 'On a more down-to-earth level, there is now a solid web > metadata standard in place in JSON-LD. The big search engines index it > and presumably use it to give better results. Any startup can add > value to published data by adding links - in a significant extension > to the "API economy".' > <sbp> *lots* of chatter about JSON-LD here > <sbp> from 2010, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON-LD > <sbp> but it's funny because Wikipedia says: "The encoding is used by > Google Knowledge Graph[6] and others[who?]." > <sbp> one of the top results for JSON-LD is an SEO weblog saying: "In > this post, we'll shed some light on Schema.org and JSON-LD. What is it > and how can you put it to use for your website?" > <sbp> lots more SEO posts too > <sbp> something more recent: > https://blog.codeship.com/json-ld-building-meaningful-data-apis/ > <sbp> so I guess JSON-LD was the latest fad, covering about 2010 to 2014 > <sbp> mostly in conjunction with schema.org > <sbp> Manu Sporny on the creation of JSON-LD: > <sbp> "RDF is a shitty data model. It doesn’t have native support for > lists. LISTS for fuck’s sake! The key data structure that’s used by > almost every programmer on this planet and RDF starts out by giving > developers a big fat middle finger in that area." > <sbp> http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins-2/ > libby has left IRC (Quit: libby) > <sbp> I mean, it absolutely did have lists, and N3 showed how to do it > <sbp> it didn't have them as an enclosed object though. I wonder if it > should have done, a bit like how Haskell has Text now (opaque blob) as > well as String (inductive data structure) > <sbp> you can unpack one to get the other. Text is for > representational efficiency > <sbp> 'That said, after 7+ years of being involved with Semantic Web / > Linked Data, our company has never had a need for a quad store, > RDF/XML, N3, NTriples, TURTLE, or SPARQL. When you chair standards > groups that kick out “Semantic Web” standards, but even your company > can’t stomach the technologies involved, something is wrong.' > <sbp> now he can add JSON-LD to that list :-) > <sbp> lots of people I remember mentioned in the Postscript > <sbp> there's also a bit on > https://bibwild.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/is-the-semantic- > web-still-a-thing/ > which takes the Betteridge's law tack > <sbp> so we had the Semantic Web (2001-2005), Linked Data (2006-2010), > JSON-LD (2010-2014), and now the Data Activity (2015-) rump. some > interesting phases there. I stopped working on this in 2007, so that > explains why I hadn't heard of JSON-LD > <sbp> (actually I had) > <sbp> these days I tend to think that the problem with the Semantic > Web was not the Semantic part, it was the Web part. renting a domain > from ICANN, putting it through the torture of DNS, serving things over > HTTP/2 (Google Lightning™), through centralised CAs, it's not the > easiest thing to do and it's not the cheapest thing to do > <sbp> so people share through centralised services, and we get the > problem that Peter Mika pointed out > <sbp> but the original idea, which is something like upgrading the > lisp machine from trees to graphs (incurring a bunch of > algorithmically intractable problems like graph isomorphism in the > process, whoops! nobody ever said timbl was a great coder), making > symbols global and universal, and then linking together all the graphs > in a decentralised system, was actually a pretty good one > <sbp> if only we had a decentralised system to put it into, eh? > <sbp> these days we have the blockchain for name resolution, but > nobody has figured out a decent DNS alternative through it yet (there > have been many attempts). actually the best alternative is still Tor's > .onion, which is kinda funny. and as for decentralised storage, IPFS > was the closest there, but that seems to be losing traction too > <sbp> so no Semantic Decentralised Web is possible just yet > <sbp> so yeah, the Semantic Web may be out of the golden age, but I > think like lisp it'll be one of those things that sticks around and > gets rediscovered over and over, continually informing (and warning) > the future > > -- > Sean B. Palmer, http://inamidst.com/sbp/ > >
Attachments
- application/pdf attachment: Business.pdf
Received on Thursday, 12 October 2017 06:00:24 UTC