W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2017

Which semantics?

From: Sebastian Samaruga <ssamarug@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 14:21:55 -0300
Message-ID: <CAOLUXBs0MDd2SddmpOo5NaqzfgTqvEs1ic-B3Gn3x+34KhcpKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: semantic-web@w3.org, public-rww <public-rww@w3.org>, pragmaticweb@lists.spline.inf.fu-berlin.de
Sorry for me being so ignorant. But what could be called 'semantic' (in the
sense of 'meaning', I suppose) for the current frameworks, at least the
couple I know, available for ontologies of some kind if they could assert
between their instances which statements and resources are equivalent
(being them in a different language/encoding or different 'contextual'
terms for the same subjects for example).

Another important lack of 'semantics' is ordering (temporal or whatsoever)
where a statement or resource should be treated at least in relation to
their previous or following elements.

If my last posts where so blurry is because I try to address some of this
issues, besides others, trying no to fall in the promise that adhering to
one format will free us all of any interoperability hassles. Remember a
similar promise from XML: "All we have to do is share DTDs and
interoperate". I'll still trying to give the format a twist (RDF Quads) but
I'll publish a Google Document open for comments.

Received on Tuesday, 14 February 2017 17:26:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:49 UTC