Guest / Items

Semantics Incorporated: Tying Web 3.0, the Semantic Web and Linked Data Together --- Part 1/3: Web 3.0 Will Not Solve Information Overload

Get Feed
Semantics Incorporated: Tying Web 3.0, the Semantic Web and Linked Data Together --- Part 1/3: Web 3.0 Will Not Solve Information Overload
Description

Over the past few weeks I have tried to dig deeper into the different concepts of semantic web, linked data, and web 3.0, to develop a better understanding of whether it matters, why, and what it all means from a web user angle. That led me to review recent articles in Nodalities magazine, attend discussions on Taxonomies, and talk to new startups. The Web 3.0 and Semantic Conferences are coming up and I thought that would also help me not to look too idiotic at the "Idiots’ Guide to the Semantic Web and Web 3.0" panel I’ll be participating in.........

One of the focuses of my quest was to try and assess whether, as Tim Berners-Lee put it over a year ago in an interview by Paul Miller , the Semantic Web is “open for business”. Another related goal was to try and compare the cost and benefits of Linked Data, an important component of the Semantic Web as most would agree (where people differ is whether it is a requisite or not). I’ll tackle that across this series of posts.

Now, I know there have been many attempts to define the terms Semantic Web, Linked Data, and Web 3.0, a few of which I have been a part of. I think all of those are worthwhile, especially when they get more people interested in the subject (thereby increasing our collective ability to shape and define those terms in a virtuous loop!). In my eyes of technology pollinizer for businesses and evangelist for the smarter web we all aspire to, the best definitions are the simplest ones. And it’s always worth clarifying what we mean by those terms prior to talking extensively about them. So here is yet another crack at it, one that is intended to point out ...

Original URL

Comments

  • Public Comments

    • 6 months ago


      Nice try but a bad structure. The article is written as if the author tries to find the questions & answers while writing.
      • 6 months ago


        Thanks for reading it and sorry you didn't appreciate the narrative tone :) Check out part 2 and share your feedback.
    • 6 months ago


      I kind of like the sentence "This looks like a lose-lose competitive war in which every app tries to establish itself as the unique platform and does nothing well anymore as a result." It's really difficult to see the business model in opening up your silo if you are a Facebook company. For users the advantages are obvious but not for companies. Opening up the silos then where are the website and the potential for ad revenue? Will we just have a lot of sites exposing and giving access to data editing in various ways? BTW in the end all this should be integrated into the desktop (calendars, email, etc.)
    Add a Comment
Report This

Twine is about discovering, collecting and sharing the content that interests you. Learn More

Join Twine

Stats

First Posted By

First Comment By

Forgot your password?