Re: Use of Content Management Systems, ranking and usage in Semantic Web

Hi Milton

I have been thinking of how what you say below relates to your first
message about cms semantic functions, and I think the post takes a
different tack altogether (I am just trying to be coherent in my own

 "one size fits all" approach will not work.
not sure what are you refererring to here...

> If we just stick to the general fields of science and technology we will
> encounter dozens of clusters of interrelated disciplines with sometimes
> common but more often slightly different fields of formal and informal
> concepts, definitions, theories, terminology and bodies of work derived from
> these.

yes, I am observing that, and find the knowledge puzzle irresistible


> In particular the approach used in the OpenEHR (, based on
> archetypes and templates is the closest thing we have seen to a knowledge
> modeling paradigm in which a restricted language domain is used.

arent archetypes 'personas?'  and arent templates 'schemas?

I havent looked into this yet, but we must make sure that a novel
approach is not confused with novel names /applications for existing

> If we just look at two required ingredients for the success of semantic web
> technologies, browser and search engine capabilities for handling semantic
> content, we will see that archetypes and templates are actually a very good
> hands-on approach to dealing with information extraction and formatting.

possibly, depending on the requirement I guess
> Archetypes and templates are a clever way of getting around a lot of the
> problems and yes you may not be far off at all that "reasoning parsers" for
> browsers and search engines may just be a way to get around of the problems.
> As web users we "personalize" our web pages in domains like MySpace,
> Facebook, Yahoo, Hotmail, on professional web sites etc.
> Why not personalize our browsers and the search engines we use by having
> them use "reasoning parsers" to extract the information we need?
> Now here comes the mind blowing part!!! We can set up web pages by tagging
> them in some way to be processed for information extraction and semantic
> content generation in such a way that digital repositories on the web will
> actually identify these sites as part of a "vernacular" form belonging to a
> particular category using ontologies out of a particular "language group"
> (the Yahoo Category versus the Google Brute Force approach to indexing
> information).

yes.......that's what metadata was designed to do, since the dublin
core days - I think

 In such a context the question if RDF can be useful in outputting triples
> that make sense can be rephrased to how we output triples that make sense in
> predefined vernaculars or language domains (language here not being the
> linguistic, but the field of scientific discipline /technology type).

okay, I think I understand, kind of 'macros'
> We submitted an idea Project 10 to the 100 at Google

good luck with it

> They must be on to something!
> Milton Ponson
> GSM: +297 747 8280
> Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation

Received on Saturday, 15 November 2008 01:49:00 UTC