《The semantic web will not work because ti breaks the internet》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《The semantic web will not work because ti breaks the internet（2页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、Metadata and The Semantic Web problemThe semantic web breaks the internet model, it demands too high a level of precision and it tries to wrest control from the user and place it in the hands of the model maker. Wont work.It presumes that whoever builds the taxonomy in the first place, knows and can
2、 define to everyones satisfaction, what they mean by the taxonomy. Before we can come close to Tim Berners-Lees idea, we have to have a taxonomy of taxonomies that defines how taxonomies work and what their common terms mean and how they develop, define and disseminate their uncommon terms. Sounds t
3、o me rather like TMBW (too much bloody work) for no effective return, and dont get me started on ontologies.THEN they have to define the content not only in terms that make current sense, but that leave open the certainty that uses will be found for the information at some future date, that have not
4、 even been thought of yet.THEN we have the problem that creators of information can only vaguely tell us what that information is about. Heres a conundrum; my wife delivered her PhD this year and one of the biggest problems is finding people to evaluate it. At that level, it is reasonable to expect
5、that the candidate is working on something about which most of the world hasnt a clue and which will require even highly informed people to learn significantly new material tangential to the speciality that qualifies them to evaluate the paper in the first place. No doubt we all feel that our work i
6、s seminal and suitably impressive to anyone who matters, but we are to say the least biased about its quality and totally ignorant about how others will view it or use it in the future.This is a problem because I see metadata as a container. The more perfectly you define it, the narrower the contain
7、er with the fewest holes. That makes it wonderful right now and a closed book in a year. The value, even the purpose of the information is defined by other peoples use of it and their opinion of it, not by the writer. Metadata cannot deal with that, nor can it anticipate its importance in the future
8、. The Gettysburg address includes this, “The world will little note nor long remember what we say here” http:/www.iath.virginia.edu/readings/gettysburg.txt wrong, what if Lincoln had been responsible for the metadata?THEN we have the very human problem that people lie. Metadata depends for its valid
9、ity on the owner being both accurate and honest about the content and anyone who relies on that shops on the TV Shopping channel. Plenty of them, but would you depend on them?From my bit at QuestNet:Give Us the ToolsWhen Doc Searls more learning focused, useful tools that take advantage of the chara
10、cteristics of connectivity and networking, and let the bandwidth demands follow.Give us tools that manage information, not documents, they need to be reputation- aware annotation systems, with flexible tools for teachers and learners to assemble arguments and interact with each other. And I want the
11、 control of them in my hands as easily as I control a piece of chalk and a blackboard.Annotation is more important than metadata. Theres a lot of talk about metadata, ontologies and the semantic web. I dont listen to much of it because it hardly matters what you think your document or resource is ab
12、out, or how you think it can be used, or how good it is. What matters is what I think about it and how I use it, then what the people I respect, and the people they respect, think of it and how they used it. Thats why annotation is crucial, I need to be able to be able to make my own annotations on,
13、 link them to the annotations of others and understand how the work enhances or diminishes your reputation in my chosen field.Tools like that, attached to everything would be good, and ways for them to draw horizons defined as I require and then to maintain those horizons in the way that Kazaa and o
14、ther file sharing P2P system work is mandatory.Google gets it. Google doesnt understand particle physics, rare plant physiology or the life of Van Gogh, but if you ask it a question on that subject, it returns very good results. That is because Google understands the internet economy of links and op
15、inions. That is why Google has bought Blogger, because the Blogosphere is a snake pit of densely linked opinions and it is from that very dense web that Google draws for its services. It doesnt matter what the content of a document is, beyond some basic keywords, Google doesnt even read the meta tag
16、s. What it does is read its relationship with other documents on the same subject and, using the economy of the net, figure out how respected that information or informant is. Then it publishes the ranking.As Blogs experiment with Trackback and other linking concepts, the possibility is that the web will turn into an isometric network with ranking and rating built into the links themselves. At that stage the emergent intelligence o
