- From: Orri Erling <erling@xs4all.nl>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:45:21 +0100
- To: <public-sweo-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <DIEBIJHLANKBNNOKDPCCMEIOJOAA.erling@xs4all.nl>
Hi I read the proposed flyer and re-read the FAQ and Myth Busting pages. They are all pretty good but we could use some more concise definitions, specially if we are talking about a flyer about the semantic web in general, not a particular conference. How do we say in one short sentence what the semantic web is all about? How do we turn this into a catch phrase? I will return to the very basics here. - The semantic web is about giving all things a URI and making statements about these things. In this way, all things are potentially combinable with all other things, regardless of provenance and almost regardless of "database schema" utilized. [I say schema and not ontology because this is a familiar term to the IT audience.] SOA gave us "canned" services for transactions and predefined queries. The semantic web potentially gives us a way to ask ad hoc questions and to represent their answers in a universally understood and navigable format. The semantic web is a shared representation for information that can come from any variety of sources. In this sense it decouples the information from its storage format and source, a little like SOA decouples the invocation of the service from its implementation. [We note that the same claim was made of relational databases when they were new.] Now how do we say these things better? The key concepts are "combining", "ad hoc," "heterogenous." Can we cook up a catch phrase around these? "Web of data" is pretty good as a moniker. "web of relations" [as opposed to web of documents] "web of facts" Using "web"capatilizes on www and contains the idea of multiple authorship and decentralization. I will have to think more about this. We also talked about use cases. Coining catch phrases is easier when the context is better defined. For things like the Interlinking community project, the task is a lot easier. There are all kinds of self-explaining queries that can be showcased against dbpedia, for example. We might also want a use case from the press world. There were a few talks at the last ISWC about RDF in the newsroom. This is relevant for any information worker, pretty much regardless of industry. As for the FAQ, I will think further about contrasting RDF with relational databases. Some more things could be said about this and the possibilities inherent in this. Orri
Received on Friday, 16 March 2007 10:17:31 UTC