<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Telling semantic lies</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 19:43:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bookmarks about Semantic</title>
		<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-6410</link>
		<dc:creator>Bookmarks about Semantic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 07:45:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hayesdavis.net/?p=24#comment-6410</guid>
		<description>[...] - bookmarked by 5 members originally found by ishiyamania on 2008-11-12  Telling semantic lies  http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/ - bookmarked by 6 members originally found [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8211; bookmarked by 5 members originally found by ishiyamania on 2008-11-12  Telling semantic lies  <a href="http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/" rel="nofollow">http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/</a> &#8211; bookmarked by 6 members originally found [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GeekAustin.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; GeekAustin tidbits - drink n&#8217; think, semantics, h8 for cancer &#38; happy hours</title>
		<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>GeekAustin.org &#187; Blog Archive &#187; GeekAustin tidbits - drink n&#8217; think, semantics, h8 for cancer &#38; happy hours</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:23:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hayesdavis.net/?p=24#comment-29</guid>
		<description>[...] Troy Williams, CEO of PeoplePad, and Robert Pettengill. Several folks, like John Eric Metcalf and Hayes Davis, had thoughtful write-ups of the event; and Michelle Greer, armed with a flash she borrowed from [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Troy Williams, CEO of PeoplePad, and Robert Pettengill. Several folks, like John Eric Metcalf and Hayes Davis, had thoughtful write-ups of the event; and Michelle Greer, armed with a flash she borrowed from [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mark</title>
		<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-23</link>
		<dc:creator>mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:12:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hayesdavis.net/?p=24#comment-23</guid>
		<description>Trust has at least been identified as a major part of the Semantic Web.  I haven&#039;t read much on it, but came across this resource a bit ago.  It&#039;s a daunting list, but has some good research articles that will get your mind working.

http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/SWTSGuide/

You frame the issue of trust nicely though.  Very practical description.

And I agree with the previous commenters; &#039;better search&#039; isn&#039;t my grand vision of the Semantic Web either.  Intelligent agents, improved data quality, and easier ways to exchange data are the things I&#039;m really looking forward to.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Trust has at least been identified as a major part of the Semantic Web.  I haven&#8217;t read much on it, but came across this resource a bit ago.  It&#8217;s a daunting list, but has some good research articles that will get your mind working.</p>
<p><a href="http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/SWTSGuide/" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/SWTSGuide/?referer=');">http://www4.wiwiss.fu-berlin.de/bizer/SWTSGuide/</a></p>
<p>You frame the issue of trust nicely though.  Very practical description.</p>
<p>And I agree with the previous commenters; &#8216;better search&#8217; isn&#8217;t my grand vision of the Semantic Web either.  Intelligent agents, improved data quality, and easier ways to exchange data are the things I&#8217;m really looking forward to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nodalities &#187; Blog Archive &#187; This Week&#8217;s Semantic Web</title>
		<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-22</link>
		<dc:creator>Nodalities &#187; Blog Archive &#187; This Week&#8217;s Semantic Web</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:44:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hayesdavis.net/?p=24#comment-22</guid>
		<description>[...] Telling semantic lies [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Telling semantic lies [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny</title>
		<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-21</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 08:57:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hayesdavis.net/?p=24#comment-21</guid>
		<description>As Ryan suggests, I think &quot;better search&quot; is something of a red herring when it comes to the Semantic Web. To a great extent the kind of search we know and love today (Google etc) is an artifact of generally only having human-readable documents available from which to build indexes. 

But your point is a very good one - as we get more machine-readable data on the Web, questions of trust and provenance become considerably more significant. So far we&#039;ve only really seen &quot;lower case&quot; semantic web approaches in the wild, e.g. I&#039;m likely to trust the tags you use in your del.icio.us feed because I trust you. (Note also that these pieces of metadata are out-of-line, not actually in the documents being referenced).

If you can make rich descriptions of resources (as Semantic Web technologies allow), then one at least has a way of saying &quot;I believe this&quot; or &quot;this is a lie&quot;. Generally the statements in question are associated with URIs, and with the Resource Description languages there is a means to express levels of confidence in those resources (thus the &quot;upper case&quot; Semantic Web approach).

There&#039;s a paper around called &quot;Named Graphs, Provenance and Trust&quot; (Google!) which talks of RDF graphs, but if you bear in mind that a HTML doc (at a given URI) can be considered a named graph (named with the URI, the graph being all the machine-readable statements it contains) then there&#039;s a relatively straightforward mechanism for dealing with this stuff. 

While I don&#039;t imagine it occurring outside of specialist applications any time soon (again as Ryan suggests) inference can also help. An advanced example of this is Tim Berners-Lee&#039;s &quot;Oh Yeah?&quot; button, which you press to discover the chain of authority behind any statements you encounter.

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/UI.html#OhYeah</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Ryan suggests, I think &#8220;better search&#8221; is something of a red herring when it comes to the Semantic Web. To a great extent the kind of search we know and love today (Google etc) is an artifact of generally only having human-readable documents available from which to build indexes. </p>
<p>But your point is a very good one &#8211; as we get more machine-readable data on the Web, questions of trust and provenance become considerably more significant. So far we&#8217;ve only really seen &#8220;lower case&#8221; semantic web approaches in the wild, e.g. I&#8217;m likely to trust the tags you use in your del.icio.us feed because I trust you. (Note also that these pieces of metadata are out-of-line, not actually in the documents being referenced).</p>
<p>If you can make rich descriptions of resources (as Semantic Web technologies allow), then one at least has a way of saying &#8220;I believe this&#8221; or &#8220;this is a lie&#8221;. Generally the statements in question are associated with URIs, and with the Resource Description languages there is a means to express levels of confidence in those resources (thus the &#8220;upper case&#8221; Semantic Web approach).</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a paper around called &#8220;Named Graphs, Provenance and Trust&#8221; (Google!) which talks of RDF graphs, but if you bear in mind that a HTML doc (at a given URI) can be considered a named graph (named with the URI, the graph being all the machine-readable statements it contains) then there&#8217;s a relatively straightforward mechanism for dealing with this stuff. </p>
<p>While I don&#8217;t imagine it occurring outside of specialist applications any time soon (again as Ryan suggests) inference can also help. An advanced example of this is Tim Berners-Lee&#8217;s &#8220;Oh Yeah?&#8221; button, which you press to discover the chain of authority behind any statements you encounter.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/UI.html#OhYeah" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.w3.org/DesignIssues/UI.html_OhYeah?referer=');">http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/UI.html#OhYeah</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan Joy</title>
		<link>http://hayesdavis.net/2008/06/21/telling-semantic-lies/comment-page-1/#comment-20</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Joy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 22:55:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hayesdavis.net/?p=24#comment-20</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not someone who espouses a &quot;better search&quot; when describing the benefits of a semantic web.  Instead, I like to use the automation example. I ask people to imagine programs running automated queries on items like scientific research papers or published news reports.  The program would be able to analyze the connections between discoveries and events independently and then report back when it &#039;discovers&#039; something interesting.

But, to answer your question, describing data semantically is only half of the equation. If it stopped there, then it really would be no different than other existing meta information out there (meta, tags, categories, even keywords). The other half is being able to write algorithms that can emulate the human abilities of inference and deductive reasoning. A semantic search engine should be able to deduce that a page is not what it purports to be because the data it describes does not correlate well to similarly described data from other sites.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not someone who espouses a &#8220;better search&#8221; when describing the benefits of a semantic web.  Instead, I like to use the automation example. I ask people to imagine programs running automated queries on items like scientific research papers or published news reports.  The program would be able to analyze the connections between discoveries and events independently and then report back when it &#8216;discovers&#8217; something interesting.</p>
<p>But, to answer your question, describing data semantically is only half of the equation. If it stopped there, then it really would be no different than other existing meta information out there (meta, tags, categories, even keywords). The other half is being able to write algorithms that can emulate the human abilities of inference and deductive reasoning. A semantic search engine should be able to deduce that a page is not what it purports to be because the data it describes does not correlate well to similarly described data from other sites.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

