- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 18:58:52 +0100
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org>
- Cc: Timothy Falconer <timothy@immuexa.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
> Timothy Falconer wrote: > > Blog post excerpt: > > > > "Reading such comments confounds me, since they've got it *exactly* > > wrong. The Semantic Web approach is LOOSE, not normalized. http://bigfractaltangle.com/archive/2006/01/02.jsp On 1/3/06, Frank Manola <fmanola@acm.org> wrote: ... However, > if that's the case, from a relational data modeling perspective, RDF > data is *highly* normalized: Frank's technically correct of course, but in Timothy's defence, the word "normalized" came from a David Weinberger quote : [[ I fear that the Semantic Web will go the way of SGML and for basically the same reason: normalization of metadata works real well in confined applications where the payoff is high, control is centralized and discipline can be enforced. In other words: not the Web. ]] Frank, Timothy, anyone - got any words that would be comprehensible for the non-specialist but also accurately convey what Weinberger is trying to say? (So we can say he's wrong more formally ;-) Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 17:58:58 UTC