Tom,
Thank you, sir. This deserved saying, and saying again.
The semantic Web has enough challenges in describing and conveying its existing concepts without adding to the confusion.
+5
2008-03-04EST15:01:55+00:00
#
Thank you, sir. This deserved saying, and saying again.
The semantic Web has enough challenges in describing and conveying its existing concepts without adding to the confusion.
+5
tom,
those that know what they're talking about when they say "social graph" (admittedly, not everyone that uses the term) are talking about the application of general mathematical "graph theory" (see wikipedia) to the interconnections of bi-directional "friend"-type link networks.
mathematicians have been using the term "graph" for decades, if not centuries, with this meaning. to completely dumb it down, a "semantic graph" would be what a computer (ie. Google) uses as in internal representation of the "semantic links" (uni- or bi-directional, direct or indirect, etc.) to do its magic.
i can understand how a LibArts major like yourself wouldn't have come into contact with these terms in your schooling, but please take this opportunity to check out the "dark side" of the maths behind this stuff if you're at all interested. or maybe you only like thinking about the end-user experience and not the underlying processes involved in making it work?? no harm, no foul. some people like both though, and the term "graph" is accurate for what they're working on, when described to anyone.
now "web 3.0"... that's just idiocy.
Not only does it falsely imply the need for a "social web" (web 2.0) to predate or underly the "semantic web", it also assumes that there will be no other major improvements prior to the realization of a "semantic web".
*sigh*
2008-03-04EST20:10:08+00:00
#
those that know what they're talking about when they say "social graph" (admittedly, not everyone that uses the term) are talking about the application of general mathematical "graph theory" (see wikipedia) to the interconnections of bi-directional "friend"-type link networks.
mathematicians have been using the term "graph" for decades, if not centuries, with this meaning. to completely dumb it down, a "semantic graph" would be what a computer (ie. Google) uses as in internal representation of the "semantic links" (uni- or bi-directional, direct or indirect, etc.) to do its magic.
i can understand how a LibArts major like yourself wouldn't have come into contact with these terms in your schooling, but please take this opportunity to check out the "dark side" of the maths behind this stuff if you're at all interested. or maybe you only like thinking about the end-user experience and not the underlying processes involved in making it work?? no harm, no foul. some people like both though, and the term "graph" is accurate for what they're working on, when described to anyone.
now "web 3.0"... that's just idiocy.
Not only does it falsely imply the need for a "social web" (web 2.0) to predate or underly the "semantic web", it also assumes that there will be no other major improvements prior to the realization of a "semantic web". *sigh*
Hello Tom. My name is Mike Reynolds I hopped on over hear after seeing some of your detailed edits at the DataPortability.org wiki (Confluence).
I must say your site design is brilliant. I have the feeling that there are just so many dynamic semantic things happening here - invisible to the eye of course.
It's time to retire the Web#.# term. Let's just make something more usable.
I'm a member of the Evangelism action group at DataPortability.org. This means that I talk quite a lot, but that I really don't know what I'm talking about
But just to let you know, I've just started acquiring info on the semantic web, perhaps pushed into this by Google's SocialGraph API. It's out there now, so what is it? I know enough that rel="friend" is important --- and beyond that API I know that RDF is useful but very complex.
By trade, I'm an applied mathematician and statistician - and currently am a theme park analyst for a big entertainment company.
I've subscribed to your RSS feeds. You are now feed # 680, which happens to correspond to a great class I took in advanced graph theory.
Cheers,
Mike
2008-03-08EST04:57:49+00:00
#
I must say your site design is brilliant. I have the feeling that there are just so many dynamic semantic things happening here - invisible to the eye of course.
It's time to retire the Web#.# term. Let's just make something more usable.
I'm a member of the Evangelism action group at DataPortability.org. This means that I talk quite a lot, but that I really don't know what I'm talking about
But just to let you know, I've just started acquiring info on the semantic web, perhaps pushed into this by Google's SocialGraph API. It's out there now, so what is it? I know enough that rel="friend" is important --- and beyond that API I know that RDF is useful but very complex.
By trade, I'm an applied mathematician and statistician - and currently am a theme park analyst for a big entertainment company.
I've subscribed to your RSS feeds. You are now feed # 680, which happens to correspond to a great class I took in advanced graph theory.
Cheers,
Mike
Thanks Mike. I use getsemantic.com as a place to host links to RDF and Semantic Web tutorials and guides. I do need to beef it up though.
2008-03-08EST12:10:19+00:00
#
Thanks Tom, I'm going to download the semantic-related podcasts to listen to in my daily 40min commute.
2008-03-08EST14:08:10+00:00
#
