- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 11:44:59 -0500
- To: Phil Tetlow <philip.tetlow@uk.ibm.com>, danbri@w3.org
- Cc: "best-practice list" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
FWIW, I was planning to raise some objections when this went out - I can do it now -- basically, I think we should remove the discussion of "a collection of semantic webs" which is both naive and misleading (section 3.4 of [1]) -- rather, if you wish to refer to something like "Semantic intra-nets" or such I could live with that -- the point is this content all lives in the same exact address space (the http URI space) and separate documents within corporations or the like, may be protected by firewalls, or by lack of linking, but since they still participate in this same universal space (and via same protocols, standards, etc;) saying "Semantic Webs" is as wrong as referring to separate "Webs" -- the WWW has intranet/intraweb components which are walled-off from others, and this was crucial to early Web development, but it is exactly that these could eventually be linked to others that we have a (singular) World Wide Web, and conveying the idea that somehow the Sem Web is different is both misleading and wrong -- if someone totally foolish wanted to create their own, unregistered URI scheme, keep their ontologies against that scheme (and I guess copy the owl namespace into that space or else they link via owl: concepts), and make sure nothing every touched the rest of the Web it could be a separate Semantic Web, but it seems like an odd and vicious idea to do so. Linking "islands" of the Semantic Web will eventually be very important to its success, and it is VERY important that we don't convey the idea that these islands are somehow separate -- if we do, then much of the Sem Web technology "degrades" back to the traditional, unlinkable, AI stuff, which is what we are trying to avoid. Tim BL and I had a fight with one of the EU funders who kept trying to refer to multiple Semantic Webs, and seeing SWBP feed into this foolish misconception would not be a good thing -Jim Hendler AC Rep MIND Lab [1] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/SE/ODA/ At 8:47 +0000 11/14/05, Phil Tetlow wrote: >Dan, > >How do you suggest we go about SWIG review of the ODA note? > >It can be found at http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/SE/ODA/ > >Best Regards, > >Philip Tetlow >Senior Consultant (Certified Technical Architect) >IBM Business Consulting Services > >Mail: IBM United Kingdom Limited, 1175 Century Way, Thorpe Park, Colton, >Leeds, LS15 8ZB >Current Assignment: DWP BPRP (Metadata) >Mobile: +44 (0)7740 923328 >Email: philip.tetlow@uk.ibm.com -- Professor James Hendler Director Joint Institute for Knowledge Discovery 301-405-2696 UMIACS, Univ of Maryland 301-314-9734 (Fax) College Park, MD 20742 http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler (New course: http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler/CMSC498w/)
Received on Monday, 14 November 2005 16:45:12 UTC