Thanks, Doug. ... I take your message also as a polite way to ask everyone to: (01)
(i) stick to the subject, or (02)
(ii) change the subject line when the focus of the conversation
starts morphing to something else. (03)
... everyone, please! (04)
Thanks & regards. =ppy (05)
On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Doug McDavid <dougmcdavid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Interesting technological discussion, lately. I really mean I am interested
> in such technologies, by all means. However, I observe that this
> technological discussion has been occurring within a thread that started out
> about enterprise architecture. Of course, there is a lot of technological
> concern in enterprises, and of course a major part of any enterprise
> architecture is the technology architecture, so maybe there is a link to be
> drawn there. Note the intentionally passive voice of the last sentence. It
> might also be possible (very weak phrasing) to see how the discussion of
> these technicalities might be aimed at helping enterprise architects portray
> the fruits of their labors. Not sure. Or have we changed the subject? (07)
> On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 7:42 PM, doug foxvog <doug@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sat, September 4, 2010 12:58, Kingsley Idehen said:
>> > On 9/3/10 8:47 PM, John F. Sowa wrote:
>> >> [someone wrote:]
>> >>> Let's assume you mean publicly available open data published using the
>> >>> principles in TimBL's famous meme, in this case, handling this data at
>> >>> Web Scale is the major challenge at hand.
>> >> Tim's a good guy, and he did some outstanding work back in 1991, and
>> >> he made some good proposals for extending it later. Unfortunately,
>> >> the Semantic Web has turned out to be primarily a *syntactic* web,
>> >> and with one of the worst-designed syntaxes ever inflicted on poor
>> >> innocent students and programmers.
>> > Yes, but not 100% percent TimBL's fault (I would say). At lot of it
>> > stems from people following (instinctively) rather that looking closer
>> > at his meme's (especially re. Linked Data and the Semantic Web Project
>> > in general).
>> TimBL designed the Semantic Web "layer cake" on which RDF sits on top of
>> XML and supports the semantic layers sit. He has recently pushed
>> Linked Data as part of the Semantic Web, following that layer cake meme.
>> Remember that the outstanding work he did in 1991 was also based on
>> defining an underlying syntax. The idea is that for widespread computers
>> to communicate, they need to be able to handle the same syntax.
>> My issue with RDF is not with it being exchanged on the web in XML -- why
>> should semanticians care about messaging formats -- but in its being
>> limited to triples, which XML is not. This is a bottleneck that makes
>> encoding a semantic language into RDF/XML difficult, raising complications
>> for expressing contexts, attaching meta-assertions to RDF statements, and
>> expressing ternary and higher arity relations.
>> RDF (which can be expressed in multiple syntaxes) is a step beyond a fixed
>> syntax necessary for universal computer communication. As such, it and
>> the layer cake *languages* built above it (OWL & SPARQL) need not be
>> required to transmit semantics, even if they use XML messaging formats.
>> > ...
>> >> We have to support that syntax as legacy systems, but we have to look
>> >> at where we should be going in the future. XML-based notations are
>> >> great for marking up documents, but not as general language formats.
>> > I agree 100%.
>> I agree. However, an XML message envelope around an expression in some
>> language which can be stripped in a standard fashion after transmission
>> over the web should not be considered a burden. A local system that
>> transliterates into and out of XML need not store its data in XML, nor
>> use XML-based query techniques.
>> >>> ... we compete against these folks [Oracle et al.] at the DBMS engine
>> >>> level. Of course we also complement them at the virtual/federated
>> >>> database level. These optimizations are best tasked when you attempt
>> >>> to
>> >>> use SPARQL against large RDF data sets stored in these databases. As
>> >>> for
>> >>> SPARQL-BI, they offer nothing (i.e., can venture into TPC-H land
>> >>> against RDF stored in these engines).
>> Optimization may show better ways to store data than RDF, even if the
>> queries coming in are packaged in RDF. So long as the system can
>> accept RDF/XML queries and respond with RDF/XML, its internal syntax
>> is immaterial to the outside world. If the system accepts SPARQL queries
>> and acts like a triple-store, it doesn't matter to the asker if its
>> internal processing is totally different.
>> >> That's great. But you're doing what I suggested -- support the
>> >> semantics, independently of whatever data organization or notation
>> >> happens to be used.
>> > Yes!
>> As long as the notation used in the query from an external asker can be
>> converted into (one of) the system's native queries.
>> -- doug foxvog
>> >>>> As for MySQL, I used that as an example of a tool that has a lot
>> >>>>> of potential for many LOD applications.
>> >>> That's a typical LAMP crowd gut reaction, or should I say "wishful
>> >>> thinking". MySQL doesn't cut it, really.
>> >> I was simply pointing out some good applications that use RDB.
>> >> I make very heavy use of graph representations. But there are also
>> >> many reasons for using tables when tables are appropriate. The logic
>> >> is independent of the data structures.
>> > Yes, and as you can tell, we do the very same thing.
>> >> I'll repeat my previous principle:
>> >> Always question strategy, no matter who states them.
>> > Again 100%, and if you look at my general commentary zeitgeist re.
>> > Linked Data, RDF, and the Semantic Web Project in general, that's what
>> > I've always done. You know too well that education is about teaching us
>> > not to simply follow without understanding, and this can only happen
>> > when we aren't afraid to be the sole heretic questioning memes, visions,
>> > or executable strategies.
>> > Again, violent agreement.
>> >> Sometimes the strategies are good, and sometimes the strategies are
>> >> bad.
>> >> But there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all solution to all kinds
>> >> of problems and applications.
>> > Amen!
>> > Kingsley
>> >> John
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Kingsley Idehen
>> > President& CEO
>> > OpenLink Software
>> > Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>> > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>> > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
>> doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org
>> "I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
>> initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
>> - Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Doug McDavid
> Skype: dougmcdavid
> Mobile: 916-549-4600
> Second Life: Doug McDavid
> Web: enterprisology.com
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (09)