Semantic Web certainly doesn't address semantics in the sense fields such as linguistics, semiotics or psychology do. that will take another couple of decades to come to fruition.
But the Semantic Web as a name, and just that, works just fine. The W3C continues to describe the Semantic Web as a web of data. The work at the W3C is conducted as part of the W3C SEMANTIC WEB ACTIVITY. The Linked Data Platform Working Group is one of the active groups in the Semantic Web activity. The origin of the rift in the community lies in the initial emphasis on formal semantics / logics in the Semantic Web activity up to 2003/2004 with little impact and adoption on the World Wide Web. Linked Data on the other hand was introduced by Tim and focuses on lightweight formal semantics / logic and quantity of available data endpoints on the world wide web to bootstrap adoption. On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <r...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <r...@apache.org> wrote: >> > What about a semantic web track at ApacheCon? >> >> I like the idea, and would like it even better if it was called >> "linked data", "web of data" of anything that does not include the >> word "semantic". > > > Not sure where the often encountered aversion against that term comes > from. Is it a campaign of the big information portals who are afraid > to loose power if information classification and selection becomes > more decentralized? Or is it the frustration of the first wave of > developers who decided the name must be the reason for the lack of > success of their software? Or did the semantic web just attract too > many AI people to remain attractive for the rest of us? > > Replacing the terms "semantics" with some kind of "data" just seems an > inaccurate description of what this is about. Granted, "linked data" > can be seen as something a bit more generic than "linked documents" > thus including deeper linking and non documented oriented > data-structures. However I don't see why classical "linked documents" > shouldn't fall in that category as well. > > What the 4 projects have in common is the use of technologies (notably > RDF) that allow linking entities other than data, for example persons > or abstract ideas. So I think this is about linking *beyond data*, and > with entity extraction (stanbol, any23) and inference (jena) it's also > *beyond linking*. > > I'm open for other proposals but to me the term semantics seems to > describe the scope quite well. > > Cheers, > Reto -- --- Marco Neumann KONA Join us at SemTech Biz in New York City October 15-17, 2012 and save 15% with code STMN http://www.lotico.com/evt/SemTechBizNYC2012
