[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo Team Up to Advance Sema

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:12:29 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <f551a50678b7472b03dcc8e678ad2cef.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo have hired many of the top comp. sci. graduates in the world.  I don't always agree with them, and they often disagree with one another, but when they all agree on something, you can't dismiss it lightly.

I agree, in principle, with Leo:

> One of the issues we always face as a community is the gap between what
> we know is a good ontology... and the actual practices in the world...

However, there are many questions about what makes a good ontology.  I suggest that people compare the schema.org view and the RDFS view:

Google, MSFT, & Yahoo:   http://www.schema.org/docs/full.html

Translation to RDFS:   http://schema.rdfs.org/

Could anyone in his or her right mind think that the translation to RDFS is a step forward?

I realize that some people might claim that there are a lot of tools for processing RDFS.  But LISP gave us over half a century of tools and techniques for processing trees in elegant, readable, and efficient ways.  And the Semantic Webbers tried to replace it with the world's ugliest, most unreadable, and most inefficient notation ever.

I fully agree with Kingsley:

> Most of all it means, the flawed goal of pushing RDF as the *sole option*
> re. syntax for graph based data representation is dying, and dying real fast!


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    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>