another laugher

From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:53:55 GMT
Message-ID: <DgYfm.38500$Db2.26016_at_edtnps83>



Walter, you've really got me going today. Here's more oversell from the www originator at
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-semantic-web&print=true

"The Semantic Web will enable machines to COMPREHEND semantic documents
and data, not human speech and writings."

This reminds me of Bob B's anthropo-word.

Then:

"Meaning is expressed by RDF, which encodes it in sets of triples, each
triple being rather like the subject, verb and object of an elementary sentence. These triples can be written using XML tags. In RDF, a document makes assertions that particular things (people, Web pages or whatever) have properties (such as "is a sister of," "is the author of") with certain values (another person, another Web page). This structure turns out to be a natural way to describe the vast majority of the data processed by machines. Subject and object are each identified by a Universal Resource Identifier (URI), just as used in a link on a Web page. (URLs, Uniform Resource Locators, are the most common type of URI.) The verbs are also identified by URIs, which enables anyone to define a new concept, a new verb, just by defining a URI for it somewhere on the Web."

"meaning ... expressed by RDF"? Anybody who's been around db's will
know that meaning cannot be expressed without agreement, which involves language, not just syntax, and not by any particular machine format. Anyone can define a new concept ... "just by" defining a URI? Give me a break, there's a lot more to it than that.

This whole business depends on a sop to millions of programmers who are are not very adept at low-level manipulation and would prefer not to understand the purposes of an application, working for users many off whom are being brainwashed to think that machines comprehend. . Received on Mon Aug 10 2009 - 11:53:55 CDT

Original text of this message