On 2/1/2013 12:04 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> I strongly believe that an entity relationship model based graph endowed
> with machine and human comprehensible entity relationship semantics is a
> solid base. I also believe in the virtuosity of hyperlink based super
> keys that resolve to the aforementioned graphs. (01)
I support that as a good base, but more is needed. (02)
> I really believe what I've stated above is really a fusion of:
>
> 1. http://bit.ly/T3kWUv -- Peter Chen's dissertation circa. 1976.
> 2. http://slidesha.re/SbfHQG -- You .
> 3. http://bit.ly/WFKnJP -- TimBL's DAML proposal. (03)
I can't complain, since my slides summarize most of the other
points I'd like to make. If anybody would prefer to download
the slides, see http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/iss.pdf (04)
> The key gripe (you and many others have) re. RDF 1.0 (the RDF/XML
> mangled edition) is the the following where utterly conflated:
>
> 1. Model -- entities, relationships, and roles
> 2. Syntax -- subject->predicate->object
> 3. Notation -- Turtle, RDFa, RDF/XML etc..
> 4. Serialization Formats -- Turtle, RDFa, RDF/XML etc. (05)
I agree. (06)
JFS
>> The greatest strength of both Google and Bing is that they aren't
>> dedicated to a single ideology. They do whatever works. (07)
KI
> No, they are dedicated to a single ideology: profit is a zero sum game (08)
We all need to make a profit in order to stay in business. So I don't
think that either of us can complain too hard. And it's not a zero
sum game -- unless one or another of the companies become a monopoly.
There was some danger of that with MSFT, and now with Google. (09)
> Webify is more in the spirit of putting the "Web" back into efforts
> such as "The Semantic Web Project" [1]. (010)
I agree. But some people have implied that it requires software to be
rewritten before it can interoperate. Trillions of dollars have been
invested in the software that runs the world economy, and it won't
be replaced for a long, long time. (011)
A great deal of that software interoperates with the WWW by connecting
with front ends that use HTML. Everybody on this list has undoubtedly
interacted with the Sabre System. IBM and American Airlines developed
it in the early '60s, and it still supports reservation systems around
the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabre_%28computer_system%29 (012)
JFS
>> Google, Bing, and other successful companies on the WWW do not
>> use the word 'webify'. They do whatever works. (013)
KI
> But what works for them typically works against the essence
> of the Web. Publishing content and sharing a hyperlink to said
> content is an important selfless act. Google wouldn't even
> exist without the Web. (014)
I don't want to defend everything that Google does, but they have
adopted and promoted many open standards, including JavaScript +
XML (or JSON) for AJAX (which they used for Gmail and Maps).
Google also wants to get a cleaner follow-on to JavaScript as
an open standard -- and I strongly endorse that idea. (015)
IBM is another company that hired Guha when RDF looked like
a winner. But they developed UIMA as another XML-based notation
for NLP because they believed it was more efficient than RDF.
Then they donated the UIMA tools to the Apache Foundation. (016)
By the way, IBM used UIMA as the general interchange format
for all the components of Watson. And they're continuing to
develop it for other NLP projects -- including medical records.
(And their primary storage medium is a relational DB.) (017)
JFS
>> The most successful web companies are more consistent with Tim's
>> original vision: they support diversity, heterogeneity, and
>> interoperability. That's a major reason for their success. (018)
KI
> Yes, I agree with that (019)
That point of agreement is the most important one I'd like
to emphasize for this thread. (020)
John (021)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (022)
|