Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Semantic Web 2.0
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Semantic Web 2.0

5,345

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
5,345
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
110
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Semantic Web 2.0 Dr. Harry Chen CMSC 491S/691S April 21, 2008
  • 2. Agenda
    • Revisit the Semantic Web (SW)
    • Think about SW in the context of …
      • Web 2.0
      • Social Web
    • Speculate on the future Web
  • 3. The Semantic Web
    • It’s a vision about the Web
      • Allows data to be shared and reused across application, enterprise and community boundaries
    • Nothing new here!
      • It was part of the goal in creating Web 1.0
      • Why should we use the Web if we can’t share and reuse information?
  • 4. Semantic Web Research
    • W3C Semantic Web Activity
    • Rooted in AI Knowledge Representation
      • Some said too much KR hindered the development of the Semantic Web
      • Personally, I think that’s debatable
    • Since 2000, many tools and standards have been developed under the SW flag.
  • 5. Most Important SW Components Ontology RDF URI Semantic Web
  • 6. URI
    • Uniform Resource Identifier
      • http://foo.com/bar/mumble.html#pitch
    • Unambiguous
      • Unlike natural lang.: “G. Bush” and “G. Bush”
    • Can be used in logical inference
      • If we found two resources having the same URI, we can assume they are describing the same thing.
  • 7. RDF
    • An unordered collection of statements that describe Web Resources
      • People, Place and Things
      • Relationships
    • RDF Statement  Triple
    • Tripe  (subject, predicate, object)
    • Resources are identified by URI
  • 8. View RDF as a Graph Source: http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-rdf-primer-20031215/fig1dec16.png
  • 9. Publish RDF on the Web
    • How do you publish RDF statements?
    • Issues to consider
      • Publish for what purpose?
      • Who will consume those stmts? And, how?
      • How to compose and edit those stmts?
      • Who publishes those stmts – human or machine?
  • 10. RDF Representations <rdf:RDF ……..> <….> <….> </rdf:RDF> XML Encoding Graph stmt(docInst, rdf_type, Document) stmt(personInst, rdf_type, Person) stmt(inroomInst, rdf_type, InRoom) stmt(personInst, holding, docInst) stmt(inroomInst, person, personInst) Triples RDF Data Model Good for Machine Processing Good For Human Viewing Good For Reasoning RDF is a simple language for building graph based representations
  • 11. RDF Demo http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
  • 12. Ontology (in information systems)
    • A dictionary of some sort.
    • An explicit representation of how to represent the object, concepts and other domain entities and relationships among them.
      • e.g., database schemas and UML diagrams
  • 13. Ontology (in the Semantic Web)
    • Use RDF to create a new language for describing Web Resources and the relationships among them.
      • RDF-S
      • OWL
    OWL
  • 14. Ontology Demo Wine Ontology in SWOOP Wine Agent
  • 15. Got Semantic Web? Why the Semantic Web remains to be a “research-ish” thing? Ontology RDF URI Semantic Web
  • 16. Missing a Bridge The Web as we know it The Web that we hope to create Google Amazon YouTube HTML … Knowledge sharing Information reuse Machine-readable Web Ontology …
  • 17. The “Missing Bridge” Problem
    • Two causes:
      • We don’t know what kind of bridges to build.
      • We had the wrong design. (bridge or tunnel?)
  • 18. Semantic Web’s Missing Bridge
    • “ Don’t know what bridge to build ”
      • Many people misunderstood SW
      • Many people have misconceptions about SW
    • “ We had the wrong design ”
      • Semantic Web == “Artificial Intelligence” Web
      • Logical inference must underpin every SW app
      • Large ontology is required for building SW app
      • Maybe we need something different from OWL, RDFS and RDF.
  • 19. Misconception #1 The Semantic Web will bring about a “killer” application!
  • 20. SW is not Web 2.0
    • Web 2.0 is about building a new kind of highly interactive and dynamic Web applications
    • Semantic Web is about data – how to share it, reuse it and integrate it.
  • 21. Misconception #2 Web 2.0, JSON, Ajax will “kill” the Semantic Web
  • 22. SW is not Web 2.0
    • JSON and Ajax enable sites to publish data for building mashup.
    • But, they are not suitable for serious data integration and knowledge sharing tasks.
      • Remember the “Mash Maker” demo that Wes has shown us?
  • 23. Misconception #3 The Semantic Web is all about building an AI Web
  • 24. Semantic Web is not AI Web
    • The Web is for people, not for machines.
    • When building Web applications, anything you develop, whether it’s an AI program or non-AI program, they should serve people.
  • 25. Misconception #4 Large ontologies are required for building successful Semantic Web applications
  • 26. Bigger is not always better!
    • The use of ontology in information systems is a technique to solve a certain kind of problem.
    • By itself, ontology can’t create any useful Web application.
    • You are permitted to create SW application using a small or large ontology.
  • 27. Misconception #5 The Semantic Web is a different Web
  • 28. We only have one Web
    • Web 1.0, Web 2.0, Web 3.0 … Web 20.0 will always be the same Web.
      • Unless, we have a completely different Internet
    • Ideas and research results of the Semantic Web will be seamlessly integrated into, not replacing , the Web
  • 29. We still haven’t solve the problem The Web as we know it The Web that we hope to create Google Amazon YouTube HTML … Knowledge sharing Information reuse Machine-readable Web Ontology …
  • 30. Let’s do some speculation…
  • 31. Acting as a futurist…
    • How will Semantic Web technologies turn out in the future Web?
    • What technologies and computing trends are likely to stay in the future Web?
    • How will a social Web influence the adoption of Semantic Web technologies?
    • What’re the tools essential to the growth of the Semantic Web?
  • 32. What can you conclude from this video? http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v =JVZ6E9EnJ3I
  • 33. The Web is here to stay
    • We live,
    • We work,
    • We social
    • On the Web.
  • 34. HTML is here to stay
    • We will continue to use HTML to create Web information.
    • Most people will be editing the Web through HTML or applications that manipulate HTML.
  • 35. Open Question.
    • If RDF is the language for describing semantic information on the Web, who is going to create RDF?
      • You, me
      • Robots
      • X?
  • 36. Social Web and SW
    • Social Web is about user-created content.
      • YouTube, Facebook, Flickr
    • The more information they create, the more information needs to be integrated.
      • Mash Maker
      • ManyEyes,
      • Sentiment Analysis,
      • Wiki
  • 37. Open Question
    • If the future is about mashup, knowledge sharing and data reuse, how can we “free” data from web sites?
      • Consuming flickr, del.icio.us, youtube data requires special protocols and data formats
      • Consuming RSS (from CNN, Reuters, my blogs) requires no understanding of special protocols.
  • 38. Concluding Remarks
    • The Semantic Web is vision, not an application technology.
    • SW is about data – being shared, integrated and reused.
    • If we resolve our misconceptions about the Semantic Web, we see a bright future for its technologies in Web 2.0 and the Social Web.

×