OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Issues with XML and Semantic Web ?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

The problem is it isn't contract, but contracts. 
RFP by RFP.  It is great if they can all reference 
one ontology, but for that to work, that ontology 
has to be the sum of their requirements; whaddaygit? 
Another bloated specification.  Just whining, here.

It isn't that the ontology drifts: it is that 
meaning drifts.  Will I accept a noise ratio 
of 5 to 1?  Sure.  Sobriety rules.   One can't 
count on a large non-local community being sober 
all the time in all of the places where they 
make their decisions.   So not just sober choice, 
but well-considered application.  That is as good 
as it gets and why many said that frictionless 
computing was/is nonsense, so YMMV.

Don't get me wrong.  We're very happy to get 
standards for the codelists we use.  Stuff them 
into an enumeration and let us suck them via an 
XMLReader right into the database, then to the 
dropdown.  Very happy indeed.  But the real trick 
is to in near real time detect that a user in a 
particular context chose the wrong value from that 
list.  This is when the semantic stuff starts to 
have more value.


From: Jeff Rafter [mailto:lists@jeffrafter.com]

 > Do the best you can but no one
 > can make time or meaning stand still.  YMMV.

Sure they can, in the form of contracts. Essentially that is what OWL is 
for right-- a contract about the nature/meaning of a particular piece of 
information? Sure, those considerations will change over time but that 
is what versioning is for?

Semantic drift is to be expected, and I'll grant that it is a problem 
but that doesn't mean it makes the whole process useless. I know that 
the fidelity of an MP3 recorded from a CD and an old cassette are two 
wildly different things. I know that converting the MP3 to another 
format and back will likely involve some loss-- but it doesn't mean that 
the information is useless, I just have to approach soberly.

Code lists are great, shared code lists are more great-- but for each 
level you go out you have to keep in mind that there will be some 
lossiness. Fine. Still, sign me up-- if I have a program that can auto 
map 1800 out of 2000 fields reliably, I'll use it.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS