On 11/10/10 3:36 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Kingsley Idehen<kide...@openlinksw.com> wrote:
On 11/10/10 1:16 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Kingsley Idehen
<kide...@openlinksw.com> wrote:
Alan / John: maybe we could use this thread to arrive at obvious common
ground re. data integration and the diminishing need for a syntax level
lingua franca.
Kingsley includes me presumably because of a response to an earlier
message, not copied to this list.
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2010Nov/0322.html
Correct.
I think there *is* a need for a lingua franca for intercomputer
communication. But I support the idea that there should be alternative
syntaxes (as long as they can be clearly translated to the lingua
franca).
I assume we agree that mapping should be at the conceptual level while
interchange formats remain negotiable. In a sense, the pursuit of a
normative interchange format is inherently mercurial, but not so re.
conceptual schema :-)
I'm not sure what you are referring to as conceptual schema. If we
consider it a combination of logic and ontology, then only the logic
part is not (too) "mercurial". The ontology part certainly is.
Logic standing on it own as in FOL (the ultimate baseline).
Again, I don't agree that interchange formats are "negotiable". They
need to be standardized, and they need to be adopted, lest there be
(very uninteresting, but very real) obstructions to interchange.
This is were we differ.
I think we can have exemplars e.g. RDFa, RDF/XML etc.. But global
adoption will always be mercurial. Thus, middleware will always have a
vital role.
Middleware will basically play the babelfish role.
As you know, this is exactly what the Virtuoso Sponger has always been
about. That's why we nested it deeply in the Virtuoso SPARQL engine etc..
So, bottom line, I think the interesting and unsolved areas that we
need to work on are the ontologies, their development, use, and
adoption, and the discussion of format versus logic distracts from
that.
Not when Syntax and Conceptual Schema are conflated (not by you, but by
many others).
The format issue is mostly a solved problem, IMO. Yes angle
brackets are ugly, but what really matters is that a decision was
made.
Solved, but via middleware. Thus, middleware (wrapper) developers need
to grok the opportunity at hand. Outside middleware realm, developer are
ultimately aligned to syntax.
Kingsley
-Alan
Best,
Alan
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President& CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
