|To:||"[sio-dev] discussion" <sio-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>|
|Date:||Sun, 30 May 2010 07:12:34 +0000|
Hello John (& All):|
I enjoyed your slides and wanted to share a few thoughts.
I still regularly attend Semantic Web community events. Over the past few years, as the community has grown the experience level of members has gone WAY down. The expanded market is generally good news and the folks showing up recently are smart and eager to learn, but are just getting their first exposure to semantics.
I'm interested in hearing how things go. Recently, the material that most presenters cover does not even include RDFS inferencing. That would be considered too advanced for today's mainstream audience.
FWIW - This recent video  where Tim describes Linked Data (LOD) as being like a Bag of Chips says a lot about the Semantic Web community and the serendipitous theory underlying LOD.
For this audience, publishing RDFa  would set a compelling context for slides 63 - 68. It looks like RDFa is getting some uptake. Google searches for an RDFa vocabulary it calls rich snippets. Yahoo SearchMonkey does something similar. Its vocab is different. Facebook just released yet another RDFa vocabulary it calls the Open Graph Protocol.
I wrote this piece  a while back which I thought might illustrate a few relevant and pressing issues for the Web. It generated a good discussion between Cory and Kingsley. And I think it puts slide 72 (FCA) in a Web context. Feel free to leverage the info. I think you'll recognize the triangle.
In terms of reasoning, the OOR project and a migration path to the future. Slide 80 says COLORE and HETs have compatible tool kits and slide 76 says Bremen Ontology Research Group is collaborating with COLORE. Would you, or someone from one of these projects be able to talk more about how the tool kits are compatible or the nature of the collaboration? I understand that HETs is operationalized through a second order polymorphic lambda calculus with type equality conversions based on the Girard-Reynolds isomorphism. Its deductive system, at least in part, relies strongly on intuitionism and the Curry-Howard-Lambek correspondence. That's sounds quite a bit different than FOL.
Slide 81 says "Enable subject-matter experts to review, update, and extend their knowledge bases with little or no assistance from IT specialists." I'm not seeing much evidence that this will ever work. Maybe the SMEs I know aren't very smart. The last time someone said this at work during a BPMN session I asked to meet the SME. Most of our operational managers currently dismiss this out of hand. Can you or someone point to some indication that this CAN happen ?
BTW - Thought you might like this . Good luck at the conference !
_________________________________________________________________ Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/sio-dev/ Join Community: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/sio-dev/ Unsubscribe: mailto:sio-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Community Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/SIO/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SharingIntegratingOntologies (01)
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||[sio-dev] Definition of the SIO project, John F. Sowa|
|Next by Date:||Re: [sio-dev] Definition of the SIO project, John F. Sowa|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: [sio-dev] Definition of the SIO project, Mike Bennett|
|Next by Thread:||Re: [sio-dev] Definition of the SIO project, John F. Sowa|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|