Re: [ontolog-forum] Current Semantic Web Layer Cake

On 02/26/2016 12:59 PM, Nolan Nichols wrote:
> For those that haven't seen this one... The link below isn't the W3C
> layer cake, but I like how this infographic version separates XML as a
> one of many formats and highlights linked data as a simplified subset of
> technologies:
>
> http://bnode.org/blog/2009/07/08/the-semantic-web-not-a-piece-of-cake
That's a very good one. It's rather complex visually, but quite accurate 
IMO.
David Booth
>
> Cheers,
>
> Nolan
>
> --
> Nolan Nichols
> Postdoctoral Fellow
> Center for Health Sciences, SRI International
> http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1099-3328
>
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Melvin Carvalho
> <melvincarvalho@gmail.com <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 26 February 2016 at 16:55, David Booth <david@dbooth.org
> <mailto:david@dbooth.org>> wrote:
>
> On 02/26/2016 09:23 AM, Natanael Arndt wrote:
>
> Dear Juan,
> did you find any answer to to this question?
>
> And is the 2007/03 Version still the current Layer Cake?
>
>
> The biggest problem with that layer cake is that it shows XML as
> part of the foundation, which it isn't. XML is pretty much
> irrelevant. It was historically used for the first standard
> serialization of RDF (known as RDF/XML). But we now have better
> standard RDF serializations such as Turtle and JSON-LD (the
> latest, based on JSON). It is very misleading to have XML in
> the layer cake.
>
>
> XML vs JSON LD vs Turtle vs RDFa are largely interchangeable,
> actually a red herring ...
>
> Instead of reading XML, understand what is the connotation. Namely,
> a universal format capable of expressing triples via the web of
> documents.
>
> On top of that we see the giant global graph delivered via the web
> of documents (it could be delivered in other ways one day)
>
> The giant global graph (ggg) of data will be highly connected and
> self organizing via bottom up emergent design. Smart data instead
> of smart servers. Ontologies and the like will cluster to give
> common usage patterns and allow reuse.
>
> As the web of documents was the discourse of humanity, the web of
> data (aka semantic web) will be a giant declarative state machine
> for humanity, capable of reading small or large sections.
>
> But reading / browsing is the old way. We want everyone on the
> planet to interact with the sum of human knowledge. We should think
> beyond "browsers", which essentially say, "you can look but you cant
> touch".
>
> We want the ggg to be dynamic, vital, living
>
> For that you need read and write technology preferably unencumbered
>
> So every human being is a stake holder, not just mediated through
> monoliths
>
> For that you need the ability to read and write, and a minimal
> permissions and identity system, ie i should be able to control WHO
> can read and write my part of the GGG
>
> Each part of the layer cake represents ways in which smart data can
> be a reflection of the world. Syntax and technology are largely
> interchangeable, but if you get through the connotation behind it,
> you can see which aspect of the universal it is trying to model.
>
>
>
> David Booth
>
>
>
> Thank you
> Natanael
>
> On 30 Jul 2007, at 11:42, Juan Sequeda wrote:
> >
> > Is there a specific document that explains the layer cake?
> >
> > On 7/30/07, Kathryn Blackmond Laskey <klaskey@gmu.edu
> <mailto:klaskey@gmu.edu>> wrote:
> > >
> > > None of the pieces "go through" any other pieces.
> However, "proof"
> > > does border on "unifying logic" as it wraps around to
> "rule", which
> > > (I am guessing) might mean that unifying logic does
> have an influence
> > > in how rules and proofs "play together". (My naive
> guess would be
> > > that rules are used in proofs, but I don't know
> that.) A bigger
> > > concern is that "proof" doesn't even touch "ontology."
> That seems
> > > strange to me. Also, "Query" doesn't touch "Rule."
> > >
> > > Absent any explanation of the diagram, though, I have
> no idea what
> > > any of this actually means.
> > >
> > > Kathy
> > >
> > > At 11:13 AM -0500 7/30/07, Pat Hayes wrote:
> > > > >Content-Type: multipart/signed;
> > > protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature";
> > > >> micalg=sha1;
> boundary="------------ms050805050601010506060202"
> > > >>
> > > >>Graphically, this is _almost_ equivalent to what is
> the most
> up-to-date
> > > >>for now:
> > > >>
> > > > >http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake.png
> > > >
> > > >Hmm, I wonder why the 'Proof' Tetris piece has a
> > > >connection to Rule without going through Unifying
> > > >Logic. That seems like a very bad decision to me
> > > >:-)
> > > >
> > > >Pat
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >>which also have an SVG version:
> > > >>
> > > >>http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake.svg
> > > >>
> > > >>and a smaller png dump
> > > >>
> > > >>http://www.w3.org/2007/03/layerCake-small.png
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>Ivan
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>Story Henry wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> No this is the latest
> > > >>>
> http://www.w3.org/2007/Talks/0130-sb-W3CTechSemWeb/layerCake-4.png
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The applications at the top are really
> important. It is they
> > > >>>that will help
> > > >>> create tension for the convergence of vocabularies.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Henry
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 27 Jul 2007, at 23:03, Juan Sequeda wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Hi all
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I would like to know where I can find the
> current up-to-date
> > > Semantic
> > > >>>> Web layer cake. It seems that [1] is the most
> used, but is
> that the
> > > >>>> recent one?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks!
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> [1]
> http://www.w3.org/2001/09/06-ecdl/slide17-0.html
> > > >>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 26 February 2016 19:39:38 UTC

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /