Re: [tangle] getting the semweb exactly wrong

Frank Manola wrote (quoting Weinberger):

>> 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.

The "way of SGML" sounds like some kind of put-down while in actual fact 
it spawned HTML/XML and a host of other subsidiary "MLs" to which it 
was/is an indespensible parent. In fact many derivatives are sort-of 
"sissy SGMLs".

As to how high the payoff of RDFing a Semantic Web: it depends on what 
we do with it more than on what it "is".

Triple stores as a general notion portend the future of which we so 
often dream wherein we aren't hung up on just words to access the 
firehose of ambient information - which is already making sipping from 
the flood-like stream too tedious and vulnerable.

The need for "Web of Trust" implementations is already well under way 
with things like FOAF, eBay's feedback notes, and Amazon's user reviews. 
If you listen to Tim's XML 2000 talk (again!) you will find that the 
roadmap to SW nirvana isn't far off base. The "thereness" of SW is 
already a matter of "how much" rather than merely "if".

The underlying principle of http://www.uwimp.com when it becomes rampant 
in content creation will do more towards changing the mindset that keeps 
us hung on territory-free maps will take a generation to significantly 
modify but it is happening.

Love.

Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2006 23:38:07 UTC