- From: Seth Ladd <sethladd@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 12:55:58 -1000
- To: "ben syverson" <w3@likn.org>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>
> The web is mess of a trillion viewpoints -- the current SW model is > equivalent to getting an RSS feed of articles from all over the web, > with no reference to the original sources. A human can look at an > article titled "Aliens Impregnate Brad Pitt" and know to ignore it > when determining facts about Brad Pitt, but the Semantic Web has no > such capability. In fact, I think the Semantic Web would know that "Aliens Impregnate Brad Pitt" is silly, as long as someone has the following ontology: @prefix : <>. @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>. @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>. @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>. :BradPitt rdf:type :Male. :Male rdf:type owl:Class. :Impregnate rdfs:range :Female; rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty. :Female rdf:type owl:Class. :Male owl:disjointWith :Female. :Alien :Impregnate :BradPitt; rdf:type owl:Thing. To me, the semantic web is nothing without Ontologies, which bring the meaning aspects to the data. Otherwise, it's a simple graph data structure. Put the meaning on top of it, and now you're talking. When people talk about Trust on the Semantic Web, we have to trust Triples *and* Ontologies. Seth
Received on Saturday, 18 March 2006 13:37:32 UTC