- From: Mansur Darlington <ensmjd@bath.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 10:48:43 +0000
- To: info@oilit.com
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, semanticweb@yahoogroups.com
- Message-ID: <402CAB8B.1000502@bath.ac.uk>
Neil McNaughton wrote: >My 2 cents > >I must admit to being very much in the same boat as Mansur. I 'discovered' >the semweb through RSS and wrote an editorial (http://www.oilit.com) on this >'quick win' for RDF (I know - it is and it isn't but that's another story). >I think that the case for using RDF to link metadata across different XML >schemas is fairly compelling. This would involve stuff like catalogues and >taxonomies into RDF. Things get a little harder (putting it mindly) when you >try to get your head around the notion of imbricated RDF triples from >different schemas allowing 'agents' to 'discover' things about documents >themselves. Not saying that this is wrong - but seems like the quick wins >will be in having a simple and standardized way of storing metadata value >lists. The rest - semantics and the AI aspects of semweb are a bit harder to >'sell' but it's probably the 'way to go'. > >But one issue I have with much of >what is presnted by the W3C rdf interest list is the contrast between the >mindboggling complexity of the concepts and the mindnumbing dumbness of the >exapmles used. It would be nicer to have simple concepts applied to >(moderately) tough problems. > Interesting comments, and you certainly strike a chord with your last paragraph. We are trying to develop a set of practical examples of document/information search queries (of progressively greater difficulty/interest) and matching search results together with explanations of how the technology solves the reasoning problem. Of course, to do this easily, we need the tools! Mansur Darlington > >Neil McNaughton >Editor - Oil IT Journal >http://www.oilit.com > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org [mailto:www-rdf-interest- >>request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mansur Darlington >>Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 3:42 PM >>To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org >>Cc: semanticweb@yahoogroups.com; kaw@swi.psy.uva.nl; www-rdf- >>interest@w3.org >>Subject: Real World Semantic Web Tools? >> >> >>First, an apology for cross-posting this. >> >>This is a plea for help, from some fairly non-techy information users, >>but we feel it might strike a chord of recognition across interest groups! >> >>We are trying to explore the practical benefits that developing Semantic >>Web technologies might have to offer for improving access to information >>for engineering designers. As part of this effort we wish to demonstrate >>the advantages of SW technologies over conventional information search >>and retrieval approaches (assuming there really are any!). >> >>Using a document test-bed and a couple of ontologies developed weve >>demonstrated some of the potential benefits that can be achieved (akin >>to those found in any basic RDF primer or the like). We now wish to >>provide a more realistic practical demonstration of the benefits (and >>the associated costs and difficulties associated with the >>semantification process) using a range of tools that have been >>developed by the SW community. >> >>These would include: >>1) Ontology creation and lifecycle management (e.g. Protégé, OilED, >>OntoEdit, etc.) >>2) An annotator for constructing mark-up documents from the corpus, or >>marked-up proxy documents (e.g. OntoMat, MnM, etc.). >>3) A means for capturing and representing axioms or rules which >>formalize useful inferences in the domain (e.g. using the above). >>4) An interface that invites the construction of queries (e.g. plugins >>for the above). >>5) An accessible query engine which will handle querying and inferencing >>(using the axioms/rules) and present the result in a useful way. >> >>We have done our best to identify - from the hundreds of applications >>available those which: (i) work reliably (ii) have compatible inputs >>and outputs (iii) can be *used* and understood by end information >>users (we are not programmers!). >> >>Despite our efforts we are having remarkably little success. On the one >>hand we are overwhelmed by the amount of information that is available >>on Semantic Web topics, on the other we have found that much of the >>information is completely inscrutable. >> >>Fundamentally our questions are: Is it that the tools which we require >>are simply too immature (or dont yet exist) or that substantially more >>technical expertise is needed to use what is available than can be >>reasonably expected from information users? >> >>Comments or help in answering these questions from the Semantic Web >>community would be much appreciated. >> >>Thank you, >> >>Mansur Darlington and Al Lowe >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>--- >>Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre >>Department of Mechanical Engineering >>University of Bath >>UK >> >> > > > > -- Dr Mansur Darlington Innovative Manufacturing Research Centre Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Bath BA2 7AY UK 01225 386131
Received on Friday, 13 February 2004 05:48:32 UTC