stii.za.net » Blog Archive » The Semantic Web (Web 3.0?)

The Semantic Web (Web 3.0?)

Feb 06

Yesterday (finally!) my favorite magazine, Intelligence, was on the shelves again. To my surprise (shock) Vincent Maher wrote an article on Web 3.0, the new or should we say next version of the Web. Now, I’d HATE to call it Web 3.0, so lets stick to what it is called by W3C and call it Semantic Web. Sounds sooo much better.

So what is the Semantic Web? From W3C:

“The Semantic Web is a web of data. There is lots of data we all use every day, and its not part of the web. I can see my bank statements on the web, and my photographs, and I can see my appointments in a calendar. But can I see my photos in a calendar to see what I was doing when I took them? Can I see bank statement lines in a calendar?

Why not? Because we don’t have a web of data. Because data is controlled by applications, and each application keeps it to itself.

The Semantic Web is about two things. It is about common formats for integration and combination of data drawn from diverse sources, where on the original Web mainly concentrated on the interchange of documents. It is also about language for recording how the data relates to real world objects. That allows a person, or a machine, to start off in one database, and then move through an unending set of databases which are connected not by wires but by being about the same thing.”

This is very exciting and its in the pipeline for the near future. Our wonderful worldwide web is going to get clever! My browser or widget engine is going to receive data and will know exactly what it can or can not do with it and where it can display it without my intervention.
Now this is exactly why I do not like the term Web 3.0. What Vincent says does have some validity in that it is a complete new revolution and “deserves” its own version number. The problem for me is that Web 2.0 and the Semantic Web has very little in common. It is two entirely different things. So if you talk about Web 3.0, the first thing EVERYBODY is going to think is that Web 2.0 has evolved once more! I suppose you could argue that point, but in essence the two are entirely different.

technorati tags:web3.0, web2.0, semantic-web, w3c, vincentmaher

Blogged with Flock

Sharing is caring:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

9 Comments to "The Semantic Web (Web 3.0?)"

Vincent Maher said: On 02/06/2007 at 12:07 pm
heh, you are right about the problem with the name but I thought about it a lot before agreeing with the article in the NYT calling it Web 3 and here’s the logic: The term Semantic Web is too obscure for ordinary people to grasp. It sounds like something that er… is too complicated for the ordinary person to use or understand.

However, I do think Web 2.0 is a misnomer, a very popular one though. Imagine if we called it what it is: “social rich internet applications sometimes using ajax and often based on APIs”…

You know, this is only the second time in a year that someone has actually commented on my Intelligence column. The first guy wanted to gut me for being patronizing towards Zambia
Stii said: On 02/06/2007 at 1:30 pm
Firstly, I’m a HUGE fan of your Intelligence column! Enjoy it month after month.

I get what you are saying about the name. You have a good point although very little people outside of the techno-sphere (the man on the street) knows what Web2.0 is about. For me personally, Semantic Web sounds, well, beautiful! Nice ring to it. Make its sound different to Web2.0, which it most certainly is!

Lets play this one out and see where it goes.
Charl van Niekerk said: On 02/06/2007 at 5:23 pm
This is really funny. For three years now I have worked with semantic web technologies like RDF and the last year also with Microformats. Before all the Ajax and Web 2.0 hype came along, there were many people (including myself) that believed Web 2.0 would largely be about the semantic web. Obviously, we were wrong; it ended up being a lot more hype than what we hoped for.

Up until thus far, the semantic web has mostly been for the so-called “Alpha Geeks”, the same guys that were the first to be listed on the X-Philes and serve XHTML content as application/xhtml+xml, because it would appear that we are the only ones that have the skill, the interest and the vision to see the possibilities this early. If the masses never realise the benefits, the semantic web pipedream will indeed fail.

It is obvious that the W3C is a bunch of brilliant technical minds with no marketing skill to create the hype necessary in order to advertise their own technologies. And if you look at the implementations so far, they are mostly driven by non-profit and research institutions; not by companies. This will have to change also.

At the end of the day, the masses are driven by hype, and the companies try to get in on it so that they can ride the wave. This is sick, but can be manipulated and used to our advantage.

RDF, though, is indeed a little more than what the average person can handle. That’s why Microformats are so important. But I, for one, don’t want to throw out RDF yet. Microformats are not the answer to all our problems. Personally I think the two should co-exist and interoperate.
Vincent Maher said: On 02/07/2007 at 5:24 am
Stii: Thanks for that, it feels kind of lonely publishing to print when you’re used to the instant feedback of the blogosphere.

Charl: Your point about the the expectations for Web 2.0 is an interesting one and I think you may be right that the Web 3.0 hype may also miss the Semantic Web. For me the real problem is that no-one is communicating the possible impacts of the Semantic Web in a plausible way. Does Tim Berners-Lee really expect us to believe that after thirty years of hype about artificial intelligence its all of a sudden going to happen? To be honest, the icebots in Half-Life are the most intelligent agents I have seen so far and I put a few rockets up their asses (pirate R).

The other thing that seems slightly insane is the assumption that ontologies can be standardised to an extent where there can be meaningful information exchange between services. It’s a long way off, esp when you consider where we are with something as simple as markup.
Charl van Niekerk said: On 02/07/2007 at 3:09 pm
I think it really comes down to implementation. FOAF is really cool and all that, but does it revolutionise the way we work? No. Although many of the technologies are in place, they need to be used in a practical way so that the masses can realise the every-day benefits and that their lives will be made easier, not more complex.
Microformats is a step in the right direction. It’s simple, practical and has lots of implementations.
RDF and web ontologies are something a little more sophisticated. They do offer a lot more, but as I said earlier they are a little too advanced for the masses.
I don’t agree though that it’s insane to believe that ontologies will be able to exchange information between services in a practical and useful manner. However, the planning and designing of the various schemas will have to be done very carefully. The process is not half as simple as with Microformats.
Ok, so I might sound like I’m really pro Microformats and against RDF but that’s not at all the case. I think both have their place and need to be used together. But for the next couple of years Microformats will need to be the centre of focus, simply because of its simplicity. Once we manage to get really going with that, we can start with more advanced projects in things such as RDF to fill in the spaces (in my humble opinion).
stii.za.net » Blog Archive » Web3.0 vs the Semantic Web said: On 02/08/2007 at 5:55 am
[...] 127.0.0.1 » Eat THIS! » Eat THAT! » Flocking » Code Igniter » Funnies « The Semantic Web (Web 3.0?) [...]
Anthony Feint said: On 02/09/2007 at 3:12 am
I believe the next gen web will be less reliant on browsers and more integrated with our everyday lives.
Standards.za.net » » Web 3.0 said: On 02/09/2007 at 8:04 am
[...] had an interesting discussion with Stii and Vincent on Stii’s post The Semantic Web (Web 3.0?) and now we will be fighting it out on convinceme.net. See Stii’s follow up post Web3.0 vs the [...]
stii.za.net » Blog Archive » Web3.0 (The Semantic Web) building blocks said: On 03/14/2007 at 7:35 am
[...] our last discussion about Web3.0 or if you prefer, the Semantic Web, I had frequent discussions with Charl about microformats (he is the maven on this subject!). [...]