- From: Greg FitzPatrick <gf@medianet.org>
- Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 15:49:59 +0100
- To: "David Megginson" <david@megginson.com>, <xml-dev@xml.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> David Megginson wrote: > I'm still tempted to design something RDF-like but much simpler and better > documented, but so far (at the end of 2000-02) I think there's still a > bit of hope for RDF: I'm not willing to split the market as long as > there's a market to split, because the network effect is what we all > really need. Greg surmises: When I started "certain difficulty" it was certainly not willed to split anything. As you say David, "the network is what we need". And the network is also a market place and shares the rules of any marketplace and our languages and schemas and standards will all eventually stand or fall by those rules. I doubt if we will ever see another HTML-like revolution, not on the web in any case. Structure will apparently come via incrementation rather than landslide. Perhaps the semantic web already exists. Seek and ye shall find. Perhaps there is more promise in the methodology of programs such as Proverb; http://www.cs.duke.edu/~keim/proverb/summary.html than in our clumsy attempts at KR. God knows there is enough context out there to completely turn around the basis for all AI based knowledge discovery. Since this is play and plug week, and the "certain difficulty" thread well worn and ready to retire, I dont want miss the opportunity to pitch the WHA-machine and SKiCal. This is pure directory stuff. The only inference is that somebody tagged WHO: is responsible if the bits hit the fan, the only logical predicate is IS. I would sure appreciate some feedback even if it hurts. http://www.metamatrix.se/presentationer/html/tutorial/chap1.htm Greg
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2000 09:50:20 UTC