Paul, (01)
I agree with some of your points, but I'd like to qualify and extend
others. My major disagreement is with the word 'complete': (02)
PT
> Along with XML, HTML, HTTP, and related W3C standards, we have
> a complete suite of tools for delivering documents containing
> the information needed to the people who need it to act for the
> success of the enterprise. (03)
I suggest that you replace the phrase "complete suite of" with
"useful first cut at". (04)
PT
> I like Kingsley's "data-de-silo-fication" theme. (In fact, I'm soon to
> give an internal tech talk called "Down With Silos! How linked data is
> beautifying the information landscape"). (05)
Yes, but... And the major "but" is that context is essential. I don't
want to defend silos. But I do want to defend the three key terms in
Tim B-L's DAML proposal of Feb 2000: (06)
Diversity, heterogeneity, and interoperability (07)
Tim B-L in http://www.w3.org/2000/01/sw/DevelopmentProposal
> The Semantic Web concept is to do for data what HTML did for textual
> information systems: to provide sufficient flexibility to be able to
> represent all databases, and logic rules to link them together
> to great added value.
> ...
> The goal of interoperability between heterogeneous components that we
> build is one that will test the extent to which the Semantic Web is
> achieving its promise.The more diverse the systems interoperating,
> the greater the merit of the Semantic Web.
> ...
> The diversity of systems successfully interfaced to the Semantic Web
> will be an important indicator of success. (08)
There is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all tool or notation for
representing, using, relating, or reasoning about any aspect of human
knowledge. The main reason why natural languages are so difficult to
analyze is that they have achieved the ultimate level of flexibility:
they can represent anything that anyone may want to say. (09)
There are also many important reasons for partitioning the Web and
blocking access, as TBL says:
> In the Semantic Web we can represent the whole range of policies
> as logical assertions using classical logic with quoting and some
> axioms about digital signatures. We replace the fixed structure
> of groups and accounts in the web server with a component that
> verifies assertions of the form... (010)
This is a critical issue that current IT systems handle with partial
success, but everyone knows that more is needed. But the current SW
tools have done nothing to help. (011)
PT
> One of the hallmarks of "legacy" systems is the unfortunate choice
> to closely couple these components. (012)
There are many good and bad features of current systems. But it is
counterproductive for SW advocates to use the word 'legacy' as a
general put-down of systems that solve mission-critical problems
-- especially when the SW toolkit cannot begin to address them. (013)
John (014)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (015)
|