Lists Home |
Date Index |
From: Mike Champion [mailto:email@example.com]
3/18/2002 10:14:02 AM, "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>Do the other as well. Based on those,
>>the Semantic Web, DAML, OIL, and maybe
>>RDF are headed for the heap too.
>Ahem ... you said it, not me. Time will tell ...
Playing the game by the rules you set, that would
be the prediction. And no, having to say the
politically incorrect thing bothers me not at
all. That's the American Way, and candor to
one's team and one's superiors is at the heart
of good communications. That is the "simple is better"
rule in life. Complicated explanations are for
university professors and doctoral theses. ;-)
<ot>Part of making the SW succeed will depend
on simplicity in natural language. One reason
many of us went to markup was to deal with that
>I would say that the apparent victory of Google
>over metadata is another win for the 80/20 rule.
Love Google. Don't want it as a business interface.
>It will be interesting to see if the intrinsic
>complexity of human language raises the bar high enough
>so that some semantic web technology is actually
>simpler to work with than a brute force technology
>at some point.
It depends on what functionality one wants to automate.
It may be the case that some of the projected uses
of the seemantic web aren't as desirable as others.
>RISC succeeded and quietly was absorbed into
>the Intel monopoly. Once a monopoly exists,
>its leadership is the predictor of success for technologies
>that follow. MS support was the main factor
>in the success of XML. All other factors pale
>Thanks to those who educated me on RISC. So,
>did XML and RISC succeed because monopolists decided
>to support them ... or did the monopolists decide that
>being on the right side of the 80/20 point was the
>best way to maintain their edge?
I was there for that decision. It predates the monopolies.
RISC was adopted because it was fast. RISC patents aren't
all held by Intel although they broadly and illegally
>Say what one will about
>the Duopoly's business practices, they both act as if
>there is competition when it comes to technology ...
>because, in the long run, there always is.
>Likewise SOAP and REST ... if REST really nails the
>80/20 point, I expect it to be quietly subsumed by
>the "web services" vision and products of the big companies.
REST support is already there. Tool support for choosing
the architecture is at issue.