Tim Finin (finin@cs.umbc.edu)
Tue, 15 Apr 2003 15:33:32 -0400
Here are two news items triggered by OWL going into last call, one
with a positive spin and one with a negative spin. Here are the URLs
if you prefer going tight to the pages.
[1] http://www.businessweek.com/technology/cnet/stories/995916.htm
[2] http://www.internetweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=8600230
--Tuesday, April 15, 2003 http://www.businessweek.com/technology/cnet/stories/995916.htm
W3C advances Semantic Web drafts By Paul Festa, Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Aiming to rehabilitate both the technology and the image of its Semantic Web initiative, the standards group issues a number of updates and promises an education campaign.
Aiming to rehabilitate both the technology and the image of its Semantic Web initiative, the Web's leading standards group has issued a number of updates and promised a spring and summer education campaign.
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) last week issued five updated working drafts for the Web Ontology Language (OWL): the OWL Overview, Guide, Reference, Semantics and Abstract Syntax, and Use Cases and Requirements.
Content Continues Below Ad
Altogether, the specifications provide the most detailed layer of the W3C's model for describing data on the Web so that computers can "understand" more about what the data is and how it fits in context with other data.
The OWL releases join another six Semantic Web updates that the W3C made early in the year of the Resource Description Framework (RDF): the RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax; Semantics; Primer; Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema; the revised RDF/XML Syntax Specification; and the Test Cases.
The RDF, in contrast to OWL, presents a lower-level method of describing data. While OWL provides a way to contextualize information and establish relationships between documents and concepts (such as author to document to subject), the RDF irons out more basic methods of describing data in a way that computers can understand.
"We're trying to make the Semantic Web as easy as it is now to join relational database tables," said Eric Miller, activity lead for the W3C's Semantic Web Activity and a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "The Semantic Web technologies are designed to enable data from different places to be seamlessly integrated."
Miller described the year's upgrades as an "overall cleanup," explaining that testers had found previous versions lacking in terms of stability and interoperability.
Analysts have criticized the Semantic Web for being everything from a pie-in-the-sky artificial intelligence scheme to a legitimate idea that's too far ahead of its time to warrant the consortium's resources as it struggles to get basic Web services standards published.
To counter these images of the Semantic Web as something too futuristic or eccentric, the W3C has scheduled several evangelical events. These include the "W3C Semantic Tour" of Europe in June and a seminar called "Semantic Web is Here--Are You Ready?" in early May at the W3C's office in Helsinki, Finland. Both events are free of charge and open to the public.
"We haven't done a good enough job as we would like explaining what we're trying to do with the Semantic Web," said Miller of the technology's current reputation. "It's not rocket science, but a set of simple enabling technologies for data integration on the Web."
Miller also defended the W3C's continuing investment in the Semantic Web while businesses are still demanding more work on Web services standards. The two technical areas should be considered complementary and not competitive, Miller said, comparing them to the Web's basic transmission and markup languages.
"I see these as incredibly symbiotic relationships," said Miller. "I see the Semantic Web as providing the enabling technologies that do effective data integration, and Web services doing the technology for effective data transmission. In essence, to me, the technologies that we're working on are the correlates of HTTP (Hypertext Transport Protocol) and HTML (Hypertext Markup Language)."
The next step for the RDF and OWL drafts is the W3C's candidate recommendation stage. That designation is expected for RDF Core in the next few weeks, while OWL is scheduled for a May 9 status upgrade.
--W3C Work On Semantic Web Draws Criticism
By Antone Gonsalves, TechWeb News , InternetWeek Apr 8, 2003 (7:54 PM) URL: http://www.internetweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=8600230
The World Wide Web Consortium's recent release of working drafts on Semantic Web specifications has left some analysts wondering whether the group is drifting too far from solving today's interoperability problems between IT systems.
An extension of today's Web, the Semantic Web would be based on technologies that enable computer systems to "understand" the meanings and syntax of our language. In essence, computers would not just process data, but would be able to apply artificial intelligence in querying another system for information.
The W3C recently issued updated working drafts for the Web Ontology Language, or OWL. Together, the drafts comprise the organization's model for describing data, so computers can understand it. The drafts include the OWL Overview, Guide, Reference, Semantics and Abstract Syntax, and Use Cases and Requirements.
Earlier in the year, the W3C released six updates of the Semantic Web's Resource Description Framework. The updates include the RDF Concepts and Abstract Syntax; Semantics; Primer; Vocabulary Description Language 1.0; RDF Schema; the revised RDF/XML Syntax Specification; and the Test Cases.
The RDF is lower-level technology than OWL, focusing on the vocabulary for describing the data within a document. OWL, on the other hand, makes it possible to make connections, or establish relationships, between RDF documents.
While lauding the goals of the Semantic Web, some analysts have questioned whether the W3C is making optimum use of its resources. They argue that enterprises are more interested in gaining interoperability with the systems of a select group of suppliers and partners.
"If I can make sure that all of my trading partners and all of my systems in my divisions are speaking the same language, that that will solve 90 percent of my problems," Ronald Schmelzer, analyst for ZapThink LLC, said. "People are not at the point where they need to talk to arbitrary systems that they don't know the semantics for."
In taking the role of inventor, the W3C could eventually alienate companies looking for technology to solve today's integration problems. Emerging Web services standards, for example, are being deployed and are tying systems using modern technology based on extensible markup language (XML).
"We've been talking about the Semantic Web since 2000, and other than making refinements on standards, I don't think we've gotten any closer to implementations," Schmelzer said. "Since 2000, Web services have emerged as a concept to something people are widely implementing."
But W3C spokeswoman Janet Daly said RDF technologies are in use today by AOL Time Warner Inc., Hearst Corp. and LexisNexis. The W3C work is enabling companies to build applications with more sophisticated search capabilities. The group's Web services and Semantic Web technologies are complementary, Daly said. "They actually work hand-in-hand."
In addition, the W3C has continued to focus heavily on Web services, with four working groups concentrating on the effort, versus two for the Semantic Web. "The resource allocation issue is just false," Daly said.
Nevertheless, Schmelzer argues the W3C appears split between whether it should be visionary, or a group focused on more practical technologies. "The W3C's role is to support interoperability issues among organizations today," Schmelzer said. "They face irrelevancy if they don't focus on that problem."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Apr 15 2003 - 15:34:00 EDT