- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 10:26:00 +0200
- To: "Kashyap, Vipul" <VKASHYAP1@partners.org>
- Cc: "Jim Hendler" <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, "deWaard, Anita (ELS)" <A.dewaard@elsevier.com>, public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org
[JH] > I think RDFS and RDFS+a few OWL constructs are as much (if not more) > Semantic Web than a standalone ontology even if it is in OWL... > [VK] This is an interesting discussion which we have been having in the > BIORDF group and I approach this issue from the perspective > > of what is the value proposition of SW technologies. > > > > If we take a relational table, an XML schema or a thesaurus and just move it > over to RDF as-it-is, then > > we haven't added "new" semantics to the information… all we have is the > original information in the relational table/XML/thesaurus now > > represented in RDF.. > > > > When you try to sell the concept of RDF, etc. to an IT shop, they will ask: > what do we gain > > by moving to RDF, when what you are representing is already represented > using existing data formats/models? > > > > So representing something RDF+RDF(S) may be technically viewed as the > Semantic Web, but unless we are clearly able to demonstrate > > the value proposition of doing so in terms what is the "extra semantics" > being added, it will be a tough task to convince IT folks to > > adopt SW technologies.. I saw a quote not long ago, not sure of the source (recognise this Jim?), approximately: "what's new about the Semantic Web isn't the semantics but the web". I take VK's point that this in itself isn't going to convince many IT folks. I think the big persuader there is data integration, even on a sub-enterprise kind of scale. Being able to use ontologies to infer new information is a massive plus (I imagine especially in the lifesciences). Bigger still are the (anticipated) benefits of the Semantic Web when the network effect kicks in. But the ability to use RDF to simply merge data from multiple sources consistently (and query across it), without needing complete up-front schema design is a very immediate, tangible gain. The work done around SKOS (and specific tasks like expressing WordNet in RDF) does suggest RDF/OWL is a particularly good technology choice for thesauri. Cheers, Danny. (For more on selling points see teefal's brainstorming and danbri's explanations yesterday - http://chatlogs.planetrdf.com/swig/2006-03-30.html ) -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Friday, 31 March 2006 08:26:05 UTC