Lists Home |
Date Index |
At 18:31 17/04/2003 -0600, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
>These are just what I call anchors of authority in my writings and
>presentations. In the Sun project where we're putting this stuff to work,
>it's all about authority, and this authority comes directly from the
>organizational hierarchy. It works when someone can mandate an ontological
>framework. On there Web there is no hierarchy, so it seems that there are
>many undecidable problems of human nature.
>Or is saying this the same thing as saying "Hypertext will never scale
>globally" in the mid 80s? I guess time will tell.
Another way of asking it is,
what's the motivation for 'most' of us to agree to something as being
reasonable (though not perfect)?
If it really helps us to do something easier/quicker then it may be
Perhaps XML falls into this class of solution?
If one of Rogers ontologies could hit the 80/20 on some web based topic
then what's needed to entice many users into using it?
Paul implied (I think) that typical document based XML (e.g. an XML web
is hard pushed to make use of an ontology since it needed rdf based 'stuff'.
So what's the high uptake app that makes use of a really-useful ontology?