DOCSLIB.ORG

Embracing “Web 3.0”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Embracing “Web 3.0” Peering Editor: Charles Petrie • [email protected] Embracing “Web 3.0” Ora Lassila • Nokia Research Center James Hendler • Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute n an article published in The New York Times representation (KR), which is a subfield of artifi- this past November, reporter John Markoff stat- cial intelligence (AI) concerned with constructing I ed that “commercial interest in Web 3.0 — or and maintaining (potentially complex) models of the ‘Semantic Web,’ for the idea of adding mean- the world that enable reasoning about themselves ing — is only now emerging.”1 This characteriza- and their associated information. As such, we can tion caused great confusion with respect to the understand the Semantic Web through the lessons relationships between the Semantic Web and the learned from the Web’s development and adoption, Web itself, as well as between the Semantic Web as well as (perhaps somewhat painfully) from the and some aspects of the so-called Web 2.0. Some deployment of AI technologies. wanted to reject the term “Web 3.0” as too On the Web, we’ve seen the emergence of some business-oriented; others felt that the vision in the completely new business models that do indeed article was only part of the larger Semantic Web work, despite initially seeming infeasible. These vision, and still others felt that, whatever it was include the models introduced or perfected by called, the Semantic Web’s arrival in the Business Netscape (creating a community by giving stuff section of The New York Times reflected an impor- away), Amazon and eBay (marketplaces), and tant coming of age. Yahoo! and Google (advertising-supported sites). With the Resource Description Framework Sharing data (or content, as it’s often called when (RDF) and Web Ontology Language (OWL) — the discussing the Web) has unexpected and serendip- languages that power the Semantic Web — becom- itous outcomes — once you make something avail- ing standards and new technologies reaching able, you have no idea how some people will use maturity for embedding semantics in existing Web it. The long-tail phenomenon — for example, pages and querying RDF knowledge stores, some- aggregate sales of low-selling items, such as spe- thing exciting is clearly happening in this area. cialized books, surpassing the total number of best- sellers sold — defies traditional thinking about Semantic Web Background business models, but it’s important to the new Web- With more than 10 years’ work on the Semantic based economy. Web sites don’t really exist in iso- Web’s foundations and more than five years since lation — linking is what makes search engines work the phrase became popular, it’s an opportune and gives the “blogosphere” its power. moment to look at the field’s current state and From the euphoria surrounding AI in the 1980s future opportunities. From a humble beginning as through the hangover of the “AI winter” in the a methodology for machine-interpretable meta- 1990s, we’ve learned what doesn’t work: you can’t data and through a “world-embracing” vision of a sell a stand-alone “AI application.” These tech- new era of software (often — erroneously, in our nologies make sense only when embedded within opinion — attributed as science fiction), the other systems. Tools are hard to sell and often fail Semantic Web has matured into a set of standards to make good business sense (they certainly don’t that support “open” data and a view of informa- make sense according to venture capitalists). Final- tion processing that emphasizes information rather ly, thinking of AI itself, we observe that reasoning than processing. engines are a means to an end, rather than the end From one viewpoint, the Semantic Web is the itself; how you use them is more important than symbiosis of Web technologies and knowledge the mere fact that you use them. 90 Published by the IEEE Computer Society 1089-7801/07/$25.00 © 2007 IEEE IEEE INTERNET COMPUTING Embracing “Web 3.0” More recently, many people have siderable effort in revisiting and store data in a flexible schema so you can become excited about Web 2.0. Al- extending the functionality in the store additional types of information that though we abhor both the term and OWL standard, which is now emerging you might have been unaware of when you the use of version numbers, we see as OWL 1.1. originally designed the schema. The second that the movement is rife with inter- Given that much of the current is that it helps you to create Web-like rela- esting phenomena. Web 2.0 is mostly work was presented at academic con- tionships between data, which is not easily a social revolution in the use of Web ferences, that new journals have sprung done in a typical relational database. technologies, a paradigm shift from up relating to semantic technologies, the Web as a publishing medium to a and that much of the language design As RDF acceptance has grown, the medium of interaction and participa- happened in academic labs and corpo- need has become clear for a standard tion. From the Semantic Web view- rate research centers, some have under- query language to be for RDF what point, however, the most interesting standably assumed that the Semantic SQL is for relational data. The SPARQL technical aspects are Web is primarily a research vision that’s Protocol and RDF Query Language not yet ready for prime time. However, (SPARQL),3 now under standardization • Folksonomies (or “tagging”) pro- we’re starting to see considerable devel- at the W3C, is designed to be that lan- vide an organic, community- opment within the applications space guage. As Nova Spivack, CEO of Web driven means of creating structure and, as the “Web 3.0” article revealed, startup Radar Networks (www.radar and classification vocabularies; they often succeed where tradi- tional mechanisms for defining Web 2.0 is mostly a social revolution in the ontologies have failed or at least proven cumbersome. use of Web technologies, a paradigm shift • Microformats — the use of HTML markup to decode structured data from the Web as a publishing medium. (with the underlying thinking that human-readable representation now comes free) — are a step toward this work is emerging in an important networks.com), put it in a February “semantic data.” Although not in and exciting way. 2007 blog, “There is a huge amount of Semantic Web formats, microfor- interest in SPARQL at the moment, and matted data is easy to transform Web 3.0 there are already a growing number of into something like RDF or OWL for Although Semantic Web proponents SPARQL endpoints popping up around Semantic Web agents to process. have long seen evidence of growing the Web. These new SPARQL endpoints W3C is working on new approach- interest, the technology’s success has are to data what Web sites were to es, such as Gleaning Resource become far more evident in the past documents.” Descriptions from Dialects of Lan- few months. This is largely because of Numerous players of various sizes guages (GRDDL) and RDFa, to stan- the maturing of the RDF languages and are now focusing in different areas of dardize the linking of structured the technologies that support them. the Semantic Web space. UK-based data with instructions on how to Oracle’s July 2005 release of RDF Garlik (www.garlik.com), for example, transform or embed data into exist- support in its Spatial 10.2g database uses Semantic Web technologies for ing Web resources. product provided the legitimacy that the “control of personal data in the some felt the language lacked. As peo- digital world.” Specifically, the compa- Since the 2004 completion of the ple experimented with RDF databases, ny is working to let users discover RDF and OWL standards, we’ve seen a they found significant advantages over what’s known about them on the Web lot of experimentation (and confusion) traditional structured databases in to see what the aggregation of this regarding the right representation lan- many cases, especially with respect to information (exposed via an RDF guage to use for any particular appli- embedding data on the Web. As store) reveals. Dave Beckett, an engi- cation. Not surprisingly, subsets and Microsoft put it in its December 2006 neer at Yahoo announced in Novem- extensions of these languages have Connected Services Framework 3.0 ber 2006 that the Yahoo Food site started to appear — most notably, ver- Developer Guide:2 (http://food.yahoo.com) is being pow- sions of RDF(S) that borrow a small ered by OWL and RDF, as well as sev- number of features from OWL (though There are two main benefits offered by a eral other technologies. Teranode remaining simpler than “OWL Lite”). profile store that has been created by using (www.teranode.com), among others, is Other developers have invested con- RDF. The first is that RDF enables you to exploring the use of Semantic Web MAY • JUNE 2007 91 Peering Browser HTTP Ontology with SPARQL Back Forward Stop RefreshHome Print Mail @ AI application Address: > go Dynamic HTTP RDF often beyond your ownership or control content Dynamic RDF triple (and potentially hostile), requires funda- engine Code content RDF HTML and store mentally new approaches to ensuring engine triple reasoner interoperability. No longer can we Internet Zone store expect a priori standardization of every Figure 1. Sample “fractal” architecture of Semantic Web applications. Dynamic pair-wise interaction between all possi- content engines, backed by RDF triple stores, act as both producers and ble systems we anticipate interacting consumers of “semantic” data. Data exchange can be facilitated using, for with; indeed, we can’t even anticipate example, SPARQL.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trust on the World Wide Web: a Survey Full Text Available At
    Full text available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/0400000006 Trust on the World Wide Web: A Survey Full text available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/0400000006 Trust on the World Wide Web: A Survey Jennifer Golbeck University of Maryland College Park MA 20742 USA [email protected] Boston – Delft Full text available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/0400000006 Foundations and Trends R in Web Science Published, sold and distributed by: now Publishers Inc. PO Box 1024 Hanover, MA 02339 USA Tel. +1-781-985-4510 www.nowpublishers.com [email protected] Outside North America: now Publishers Inc. PO Box 179 2600 AD Delft The Netherlands Tel. +31-6-51115274 The preferred citation for this publication is J. Golbeck, Trust on the World Wide Web: A Survey, Foundation and Trends R in Web Science, vol 1, no 2, pp 131–197, 2006 ISBN: 978-1-60198-116-5 c 2008 J. Golbeck All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publishers. Photocopying. In the USA: This journal is registered at the Copyright Clearance Cen- ter, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by now Publishers Inc. for users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC). The ‘services’ for users can be found on the internet at: www.copyright.com For those organizations that have been granted a photocopy license, a separate system of payment has been arranged.
    [Show full text]
  • Semantic Gadgets: Pervasive Computing Meets the Semantic Web
    Semantic Gadgets: Pervasive Computing Meets the Semantic Web Ora Lassila Research Fellow Agent Technology Group, Nokia Research Center October 2002 1 © NOKIA 2002-10-01 - Ora Lassila Mobility Makes Things Different • Device location is a new dimension • more information about the user and the usage context available • new applications & services are possible • Devices are different • reduced capabilities: smaller screens, slow input devices, lower bandwidth, higher latency, worse reliability, … • trusted device: always with you & has access to your private data • Usage contexts and needs are different • awkward usage situations (e.g., in the car while driving) • specific needs (“surfing” unlikely) • you are always “on” (= connected) • Dilemma: • the Internet - by design - represents a departure from physical reality but mobility grounds services & users to the physical world 2 © NOKIA 2002-10-01 - Ora Lassila 1 Some Enablers of Mobile Internet • Access to services from handheld terminals • Dynamic synthesis of content • Context-sensitivity • location is one dimension of a “context”, but there are others • New Technologies • Artificial Intelligence • machine learning: automatic customization and adaptation • automated planning: autonomous operation • “Semantic Web” • intelligent synthesis of content from multiple sources (ad hoc & on demand) • explicit representation of semantics of data & services • Ubiquitous (aka Pervasive) Computing • (a paradigm shift in personal computing) 3 © NOKIA 2002-10-01 - Ora Lassila Semantic Web: Motivation
    [Show full text]
  • Awareness Watch™ Newsletter V16N2 February 2018
    Awareness Watch™ Newsletter By Marcus P. Zillman, M.S., A.M.H.A. http://www.AwarenessWatch.com/ V16N2 February 2018 Welcome to the V16N2 February 2018 issue of the Awareness Watch™ Newsletter. This newsletter is available as a complimentary subscription and will be issued monthly. Each newsletter will feature the following: Awareness Watch™ Featured Report Awareness Watch™ Spotters Awareness Watch™ Book/Paper/Article Review Subject Tracer™ Information Blogs I am always open to feedback from readers so please feel free to email with all suggestions, reviews and new resources that you feel would be appropriate for inclusion in an upcoming issue of Awareness Watch™. This is an ongoing work of creativity and you will be observing constant changes, constant updates knowing that “change” is the only thing that will remain constant!! Awareness Watch™ Featured Report This month’s featured report covers my Deep Web Research and Discovery Resources 2018 and is a comprehensive listing of deep web resources including search engines, directories, subject guides and index resources and sites on the Internet. The below list of sources is taken from my Subject Tracer™ white paper titled Deep Web Research and Discovery Resources 2018 and is constantly updated with Subject Tracer™ bots at the following URLs: http://www.DeepWeb.us/ These resources and sources will help you to discover the many pathways available through the Internet to find the latest deep web resources and sites. As this site is constantly updated it would be to your benefit to bookmark and return to the above URL frequently. The true way to search the Internet and social media is to include the deep web and these resources will be your pathfinder to all the important and ever changing resources including the New Economy! 1 Awareness Watch V16N2 February 2018 Newsletter http://www.AwarenessWatch.com/ [email protected] eVoice: 800-858-1462 © 2018 Marcus P.
    [Show full text]
  • Browsing the Semantic Web
    Browsing the Semantic Web Ora Lassila Nokia Research Center Cambridge Cambridge, MA 02142, USA Abstract lution. Enabling browsing is further encouraged by the fact that, despite its simple data model, users and developers are Presenting RDF graphs to the end user as hypertext enables often put off by RDF’s cryptic XML-based syntax. interactive exploration and inquiry of “semantic” data. In Many tools have been constructed for searching, ex- this paper we present a tool that allows users to “see” their ploring and querying complex information spaces such as RDF data, without having to decipher syntactic represen- semistructured data representations or collections with rich tations that are typically not human-friendly. The tool is metadata. These tools often offer a mixture of features such part of a broader architecture designed for viewing many as faceted search, clustering of search results, etc. Exam- different types of data in Semantic Web formalisms, for ples of such systems include Lore [7, 8], Flamenco [26], experimenting with the caching of dynamically changing and others. More specifically, recent years have also seen a data, and for exploring the possible ad hoc integration of number of “Semantic Web browsers” emerge; examples of data from multiple sources. Additionally, this tool enables this type of software include mSpace [16], Haystack [18], browsing of semantic data on a mobile device, by adapting Magnet [23], DBin [25], semantExplorer [21], and others. the hypertext generation to better suit small screens. These systems allow the browsing of Semantic Web data and provide various ways of searching and visualizing this data. Many of them combine semantic data with “classi- 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Boeing Position Paper
    Frameworks for Semantics in Web Services: A position paper for the W3C Workshop Janet L Jones Boeing Phantom Works IDeAS May 6, 2005 This position paper proposes directions for the development of a framework for Semantic Web Services, with particular emphasis on automating tasks based on semantic descriptions. Abstract Boeing examines the application of Semantic Web Services in a net centric environment. Boeing envisions a wide range of possible benefits in this context. The key functionality needed is the automated and dynamic composability of services in an ad hoc environment. Net-Centric Environment: Use of Dynamically Composable Semantic Web Services “The Semantic Web is an extension of the current web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation.”1 “There’s a revolution occurring and it’s all about making the Web meaningful, understandable, and machine-processable, whether it’s based in an intranet, extranet, or Internet. This is called the Semantic Web, and it will transition us towards a knowledge- centric viewpoint of everything.”2 A net-centric environment is characterized by seamless interoperation between systems. As more networks and nodes are introduced, the environment becomes more robust, increasing its combined capabilities. Completion of the net-centric environment vision requires mobile ad hoc collaboration of disparate systems. Systems will be interacting in new ways, supporting each other through a wide variety of advertised services. In the ad hoc environment, not all of the desired capabilities can be known in advance. These capabilities will be used by communities of interest (COIs) which form in an ad hoc manner.
    [Show full text]
  • A Journal for Human and Machine
    EDITORIAL A Journal for Human and Machine James Hendler1†, Ying Ding2† & Barend Mons3 1 Rensselaer Institute for Data Exploration and Applications, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY12180, USA 2 School of Informatics, Computing, and Engineering, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47408, USA 3 Leiden University Medical Centre, The Netherlands, Poortgebouw N-01, Rijnsburgerweg 10 2333 AA Leiden, The Netherlands Citation: J. Hendler, Y. Ding, & B. Mons. A journal for human and machine. Data Intelligence 1(2019), 1-5. doi: 10.1162/dint_e_00001 It is with great pride to bring you this new journal of Data Intelligence. This journal has at least two major purposes that we hope embrace. First, it will embrace the traditional role of a journal in helping to facilitate the communication of research and best practices in scientific data sharing, especially across disciplines, an area that is continually growing in importance for the modern practice of science. Second, we will be experimenting with new methods of enhancing the sharing of this communication, and examples of the field, by utilizing the increasing power of intelligent computing systems to further facilitate the growth of the field. The journal’s title, combining “data,” the field we will support, and “intelligence,” a means to that end, is meant to connote this growing interaction. Since the establishment of the first academic journals in the mid 1600’s, academic publishing has been a key part of scientific infrastructure, facilitating knowledge sharing and scholarly communication. Journals, at their best, publish high-quality scientific articles so that researchers can be aware of recent advancements in their fields and can have access to archival publications of the “giants” whose shoulders they stand on.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to the Semantic Web
    An Introduction To The Semantic Web Fernando de Souza 1 “The Semantic Web is an extension of the current web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation.” Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler and Ora Lassila, The Semantic Web, Scientific American, May 2001 2 1 An Introduction To The Semantic Web …extension of the current web… “. .information on the web needs to be in a form that machines can ‘understand’ rather than simply display. The concept of machine-understandable documents does not imply some magical artificial intelligence allowing machines to comprehend human mumblings. It relies solely on a machine’s ability to solve well-defined problems by performing well- defined operations on well-defined data.” From Berners-Lee, Hendler; Nature, 2001 3 http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/e-access/Articles/bernerslee.htm …extension of the current web… “Most of the Web's content today is designed for humans to read, not for computer programs to manipulate meaningfully.” Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler and Ora Lassila, The Semantic Web, Scientific American, May 2001 4 2 An Introduction To The Semantic Web …well-defined meaning… There are lots of ways in which our machines can use our web content when they can understand it. •When my personal digital assistant's calendar program understands dates, it can alert me when an appointment is coming up. •When my email program's address book understands that something is a phone number or an email address, it can set up communication with that person with a click.
    [Show full text]
  • From Atom's to OWL S: the New Ecology of The
    mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project From Atom's to OWL's: The new ecology of the WWW Jim Hendler [email protected] http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project From Atom*s to OWL§s: The new ecology of the WWW Jim Hendler [email protected] http://www.cs.umd.edu/~hendler * syntax § semantics mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project Syntax to Semantics mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project Acknowledgements • In preparing this talk I have mostly ignored the advice of a great many people including Tim Berners-Lee, Dan Connolly, Wendy Hall, Eric Miller, Brand Nieman, Bijan Parsia, Guus Schreiber, Nigel Shadbolt, and Frank VanHarmelen • I owe much to my research group – Details at http://www.mindswap.org/ (Our Semantic Web Portal) XML 2005 mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project The Web used to be easy (ca. 1990) • Documents (HTML) – Emacs or vi via some cutting and pasting and it showed in your browser - woohoo! • And Links (HTTP) – Install LibWWW, customize parameters, and you were up and running - woohoo! XML 2005 mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project But that didn't last long… (ca 2000) © Commerce One and Addison-Wesley, 2001 XML 2005 mindswap maryland information and network dynamics lab semantic web agents project Excelsior … • Syndication – Atom, JSON,
    [Show full text]
  • Knowing What AI Systems Don't Know and Why It Matters
    JHUVIRTUAL IAA SEMINARSEMINAR ANNOUNCEMENTSERIES Johns Hopkins Institute for Assured Autonomy and the Department of Computer Science Present Knowing what AI Systems Don’t Know and Why it Matters October 29, 2020 | 11:00 am–Noon Click here to access this virtual event <http://bit.ly/Jim-Hendler> Password: 962515 Jim Hendler Tetherless World Chair of Computer, Web and Cognitive Sciences Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute ABSTRACT The meteoric rise in performance of modern AI raises many concerns when it comes to autonomous systems, their use, and their ethics. In this talk, Jim Hendler reviews some of the challenges emerging, with a particular emphasis on one of the issues faced by current deep learning technology (including neural symbolic approaches) – how do AI systems know what they don’t know? Hendler avoids the generic issue, which has been raised by philosophers of AI, and looks more specifically at where the failures are coming from. The limitations of current systems, issues such as ‘personalization’ that increase the challenge, and some of the governance issues that arise from these limitations will be covered. BIO James Hendler is the Director of the Institute for Data Exploration and Applications and the Tetherless World Professor of Computer, Web and Cognitive Sciences at RPI. He also heads the RPI-IBM Center for Health Empowerment by Analytics, Learning and Semantics (HEALS). Hendler has authored over 400 books, technical papers and articles in the areas of Semantic Web, artificial intelligence, agent-based computing and high-performance processing. One of the originators of the “Semantic Web,” Hendler was the recipient of a 1995 Fulbright Foundation Fellowship, is a former member of the US Air Force Science Advisory Board, and is a Fellow of the AAAI, BCS, the IEEE, the AAAS and the ACM.
    [Show full text]
  • The RDF Layer
    Knowledge Representation and Semantic Technologies The RDF layer Riccardo Rosati Corso di Laurea Magistrale in Ingegneria Informatica Sapienza Università di Roma 2019/2020 The Semantic Web Tower The RDF layer 2 Syntax and semantics • Syntax: the structure of data • Semantics: the meaning of data • Two conditions necessary for interoperability: – Adopt a common syntax: this enables applications to parse the data. – Adopt a means for understanding the semantics: this enables applications to use the data. The RDF layer 3 XML • XML: eXtensible Mark-up Language • XML documents are written through a user- defined set of tags • tags are used to express the “semantics” of the various pieces of information The RDF layer 4 XML: example <course date=“2007”> <title>Seminari di Ingegneria del Software </title> <teacher> <name>Giuseppe De Giacomo</name> <email>[email protected]</email> </teacher> <prereq>none</prereq> </course> The RDF layer 5 XML • XML: document = labelled tree • node = label + attributes/values + contents <course date=“...”> <title>...</title> course <teacher> <office>...</office> <email>...</email> = title teacher prereq </teacher> <prereq>...</prereq> </course> office email The RDF layer 6 XML • XML Schema = grammar for describing legal trees and datatypes • can we use XML to represent semantics? The RDF layer 7 XML and semantics <Predator> … </Predator> • Predator: a medium-altitude, long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle system. • Predator : one that victimizes, plunders, or destroys, especially for one's own gain. • Predator
    [Show full text]
  • Semantic Gadgets - Extending the Semantic Web to Physical Devices
    Semantic Gadgets - Extending the Semantic Web to Physical Devices Ora Lassila Research Fellow Agent Technology Group, Nokia Research Center November 2000 1 © NOKIA 2000-11-10 - Ora Lassila Internet & Mobility: a Future 2 © NOKIA 2000-11-10 - Ora Lassila Mobility Makes Things Different • Device location is a completely new dimension • more information about the user and the usage context available • new applications & services are possible • Devices are different • reduced capabilities: smaller screens, slow input devices, lower bandwidth, higher latency, worse reliability, … • trusted device: always with you & has access to your private data • Usage contexts and needs are different • awkward usage situations (e.g., in the car while driving) • specific needs (“surfing” unlikely) • you are always “on” (= connected) • Dilemma: • the Internet represents a departure from physical reality BUT mobility grounds services & users to the physical world 3 © NOKIA 2000-11-10 - Ora Lassila Critical Components of Mobile Internet • Access to internet-based services from small handheld terminals • first step: WAP (quick build-up of a large user base) • initial applications include personal information management and connectivity, “infotainment”, (mobile) e-commerce, vertical applications & access to corporate intranet data • Dynamic synthesis of content • first step: data in XML, transformations to suitable formats • device independence is key to long term interoperability • Context-dependence • first step: customization and personalization • adaptation
    [Show full text]
  • Semantic Web – Introduction and Problem Statement
    Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. haw-hamburg.de Semantic Web – Introduction and Problem Statement • Initial Concepts • Meta Data + RDF • Initial Problems • Representing Meaning • Key Perspectives • Ontologies + OWL • The Role of XML • Evaluating Resources Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. Semantic Web: The Idea haw-hamburg.de "The Semantic Web is an extension of the current web in which information is given well-defined meaning, better enabling computers and people to work in cooperation." Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, Ora Lassila: “The Semantic Web“. Scientific American, May 2001 2 Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. Objectives haw-hamburg.de ¾ Bring machine processable structure to the bulk of Web information ¾ Provide a layer of meaningful meta information along with Web offers to identify their semantics ¾ Provide semantic rules to the community to digest Web concurrency and allow for conclusions ¾ Offer ways to learn about the reputation of a resource 3 Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. Semantic Web Layers haw-hamburg.de Source: http://www.w3.org/2001/12/semweb-fin/w3csw 4 Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. Operational Concept haw-hamburg.de R I Ux R II A2 A1 R III Ai Uy Am R K R N Resources Agents Users 5 Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. Resources, URIs & Links haw-hamburg.de Goal: Understand resources and their relations Resources: Anything addressable by a URI. Extend resources to carry a ‘type’ attribute Links: Relating resources. Extend links to carry ‘type’ attribute. 6 Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik. Fundamental Problems haw-hamburg.de Heterogeneity: Systems, encoding, structures, languages/expressiveness’, words, meanings, … Anonymity: Almost all resources in the Web unknown to recipient Context: Resources are meaningless without identification of context Scale: Peer-to-Peer view has complexity n2, with n = number of Internet resources Visions & Expectations: partly naive, partly vague, … 7 Thomas Schmidt schmidt@informatik.
    [Show full text]