Lotico CSW - The Berlin Semantic Web Meetup Message Board › Semantic Markup - Where is it?
Seth Grimes <grimes@...> wrote:
Hello Prof Ciravegna, Mr Wahler. I had made an observation about the lack
of semantic mark-up in a Web site promoted by Prof Dr Adrian Paschke,
http://corporate-sema.... See the thread below.
The same observation applies to the ESWC 2009 site. I got DBWorld list
e-mail this morning --
From: Lejla Ibralic Halilovic <email@example.com>
Subject: [Dbworld] ESWC2009: Call for Tutorials (deadline approaching)
6th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2009)
31 May - 4 June 2009, Heraklion, Greece
The conference site lacks semantic mark-ups beyond HTML Meta tags. Pages
such as http://www.eswc2009.o... , listing the
organizing committee with names, institutions, and countries, would seem
especially to be the variety that you'd want to mark up. The Web site of
conference sponsor STI International, http://www.sti2.org/..., also eschews
semantic mark-up, even the Executive Board page at
I'd invite you each to address why there isn't sufficient value to
semantic mark-up of your initiatives's sites -- http://www.eswc2009.o...,
http://www.corporate-semantic-web.de/, and http://www.sti2.org/... -- to have
taken the step of applying it.
Seth Grimes <grimes@...> wrote:
>> The Semantic Web has already hit the market and failed to make a very
>> significant impact. It won't make an impact so long as 1) it continues
>> to lower competitive barriers that protect businesses that compete on
>> price, 2) information publishers ranging from corporations and
>> government to individuals posting to social media neither see the
>> benefit nor have the tools to easily publish with semantic mark-up, and
>> 3) the Semantic Web proponents themselves don't even bother to publish
>> with semantic mark-up.
>> I wrote on that latter point in an article at
. It's instructive to view the source of our poster's, Prof Adrian
>> Paschke's, conference page at
>> to observe that it is devoid of a single RDF tag.
>> All this is why text analytics is important: Because that technology
>> can generate the semantics for machine processing that Prof Paschke and
>> other "do as I say, not as I do" Semantic Web proponents can't be
>> bothered to provide.
Thanks a lot for your critical and valuable remarks. And, thanks also for the link to your critical blog post.
I'm happy to start a discussion about why there is apparently not enough Semantic Web markup on the Web, what are the reasons, what is missing and will there ever be a common Semantic Web.
Here a quick answer. A more detailed one will follow.
You are right that our website currently lacks Semantic markup since we are using a Web CMS system which has no support for Semantic markup and we had no time yet to manually add Semantic markup or write any scripts which will do this.
But, this will change!
We are working on solutions and tools such as Loomp (http://loomp.org/...) which will support easy annotation of Web contents or Rule Responder (http://responder.rule...) which will support virtual communities and pragmatic web agents in virtual organizations / collaborations.
To give you an example you might take a look at RuleML-2007 (http://2007.ruleml.or...) where we added RDF vCards, content syndication feeds, Calendar feeds etc. In 2008 we additionally provided a first Rule Responder prototype which represents the RuleML-2008 organizing committee and implements their responsibilities and rule-based decision logic: http://www.ruleml.org...
Here you will find a semantic description of the organizing committee, with the different roles and their responsibility assignments: http://www.ruleml.org.... You will find further infos such as RDF vCards, FOAF profiles of the committee members etc.: http://www.ruleml.org....
|A former member||
Adrian, thanks for posting. I had assumed that the limitation was the software you're using. Similarly, http://www.sti2.org/... is using the Joomla CMS, http://semanticweb.or... is using MediaWiki, and so on.
I appreciate that tools are a constraint. That they are a constraint that you have not yet chosen to work around supports my point that, in your view, there isn't sufficient value to semantic mark-up of your initiative's sites for you to have taken the step of applying it.
If expert Semantic Web proponents don't see high value in publishing for the SW, why would anyone?
Edited by User 2,996,200 on Dec 18, 2008 9:19 PM