- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:18:30 -0500
- To: Kjetil Kjernsmo <kjetilk@opera.com>
- CC: public-sweo-ig@w3.org
Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote: > On Friday 12 January 2007 18:13, Kingsley Idehen wrote: > >> The skeptics are not going to grok the Semantic Web based on what we >> say, they are going to do so based on what we demonstrate (Dave Winer >> demonstrated what became the Blogosphere via his Userland platform). >> As stated earlier, Mashups drive Web 2.0, and RSS drives the >> Blogosphere. Thus, we should produce demos and tutorials that show >> how the Semantic Web enhances Mashups, Online Communities >> (Social-networks, Blogs, Wikis, Discussion Forums, shared Bookmarks >> etc). >> > > I don't think we disagree all that much. Indeed, we (as in the Semantic > Web community, not SWEO) need to demonstrate, and that people will not > grok anything by just talk. > > However, what I sense now, and please do stop me if I raise a strawman, > is that you're quite content with demos, whereas I think that we > urgently need to create a genuinely useful application, and that we > need to do that first to open people's minds before we can go any > further with any education. It is difficult to reach out to a closed > mind. > > I am not content with "demos" :-) From my vantage point "Applications" and "Demos" are very subjective :-) Like, Data, Information, and Knowledge, it all depends on ones perspective. For instance, I see the Blogosphere as a demonstration of the "Syndication" and "Web Services" related prowess of XML. Likewise, I see SIOC, AtomOWL, FOAF, Annotea and/or SKOS integration when applied to the Blogosphere in a non disruptive way as one of several ways of demonstrating the value delivered by the Semantic Web. > Now, we set the deadline for comments on the questions to tomorrow. I > was hoping that we could discuss the wording, so that we can solicit > answers to the questions themselves, and once we agree on the questions > and get it out, it can certainly be spread as widely as possible. > > Also, I agree that most of the skepticism towards RDF has been because > of the RDF/XML syntax, and so I would support the RDF/XML Lite > initiative, and I always make sure that I say in my talks that people > should stop thinking about RDF in XML terms. > RDF/XML's problems originate from historical intermingling of the Data Model and RDF/XML as the standard serialization format. If we bring more attention to the RDF Data Model and its association with a variety of serialization/interchange formats, it will go a long way to alleviating the Semantic Web's biggest comprehension and appreciation hurdle (IMHO). RDF/XML is an effective way of transmitting graphs between programs, but N3, Turtle do a much better job of unveiling the what Triples and Graphs are about conceptually through human eyes :-) People have to grasp concepts before they make tangible progress during the learning experience. This hasn't really happened re. the Semantic Web in a broad sense (i.e outside the Semantic Web community). > Cheers, > > Kjetil > -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen President & CEO OpenLink Software Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Received on Tuesday, 16 January 2007 15:18:45 UTC