W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2018

Re: Semantic Web Interest Group now closed

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 21:29:29 +0200
Message-Id: <35C42E4F-4543-4C33-8E76-FCF9B33A3213@w3.org>
Cc: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>, Nicolas Chauvat <nicolas.chauvat@logilab.fr>, Frans Knibbe <frans.knibbe@geodan.nl>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
To: Martin McEvoy <martin@weborganics.co.uk>
What about the sentient web, which blends the web of symbol knowledge with computational statistics?   The traditional logic & proof mindset will give way to new approaches that are better suited to machine learning and rational belief in a world of uncertain, incomplete and inconsistent knowledge.

> On 18 Oct 2018, at 18:46, Martin McEvoy <martin@weborganics.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> Hyperdata is actually much more appropriate in today's modern landscape.
> 
> Best wishes
> Martin
> 
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018, 15:43 Henry Story, <henry.story@bblfish.net <mailto:henry.story@bblfish.net>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 18 Oct 2018, at 16:23, Nicolas Chauvat <nicolas.chauvat@logilab.fr <mailto:nicolas.chauvat@logilab.fr>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 02:32:29PM +0200, Frans Knibbe wrote:
>>> To me, the term 'machine-readable web' excludes an important target group:
>>> us humans (assuming all current list subscribers are human). When I try
>>> explain the concepts of Linked Data or the Semantic Web to an uninitiated I
>>> like to use the terms 'web of data' or even shorter 'data web'. For some
>>> more finesse the term 'the web of self-explanatory data', could be
>>> considered, but I think just putting the terms 'web' and 'data' together
>>> sets the tone well enough.
>>> Also, a term like 'data web' is happily free of technicalities.
>> 
>> +10
> 
> I like the word hyper-data, as it helps both
> 1) show the continuity it has with hyper-text
> 2) has a fascinating relation to what is know as hyper-systems as
> described 
>    Rutten, J. J. (2000). Universal coalgebra: a theory of systems. 
>    Theoretical computer science, 249(1), 3-80.
>   http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.159.2020&rep=rep1&type=pdf <http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.159.2020&rep=rep1&type=pdf>
> 
> which is a function of the form S -> 2^2^S
> 
> ie one that takes you from a state to a set of sets of such states. Sets of states are
> often thought of as propositions, and sets of sets of those sounds like quad stores.
> 
> 
>> 
>>> perhaps even a corner stone like RDF might be replaced by something that is
>>> considered better in the future?
>> 
>> I heard of https://ipfs.io/ <https://ipfs.io/> lately.
> 
> IPFS is a protocol, so in the realm of coalgebras, whereas RDF is a data format and
> so in the realm of algebras. Both are orthogonal, and defined in dual categories.
> RDF is defined in terms of IRIs and so could easily describe states on a IPFS System, 
> just as it can on an HTTPS one.
> 
> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Nicolas Chauvat
>> 
>> logilab.fr <http://logilab.fr/> - services en informatique scientifique et gestion de connaissances  
>> 
> 

Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things 







Received on Thursday, 18 October 2018 19:29:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:56 UTC