Closing clive holtham


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Closing clive holtham

  1. 1. Web 3.0 – challenge oropportunity foraccountants?Clive HolthamCass Business
  2. 2. Timeline1951 First Business Computer1969 Internet1982 IBM PC1991 WWW Web 1.02000 Web 2.0 (social)20?? Web 3.0 (semantic)20?? Web 4.0 (artificial intelligence)
  3. 3. Nova Spivack Roadmap
  4. 4. Tim-Berners Lee, 1999I have a dream for the Web [in which computers] become capable of analyzing all the data on the Web – the content, links, and transactions between people and computers. A „Semantic Web‟, which should make this possible, has yet to emerge, but when it does, the day-to-day mechanisms of trade, bureaucracy and our daily lives will be handled by machines talking to machines. The „intelligent agents‟ people have touted for ages will finally materialize.
  5. 5. Web 3.0 perspectivesSemantic WebThe Internet of ThingsM2MPull
  6. 6. Importance of 3.0 to directorsTransformations of information and knowledgeInvestments and riskOpenness and transparencyEfficiencyBarriers & mindsets
  7. 7. The Cathedral and the BazaarCathedral: carefully crafted by individual wizards or small bands of mages working in splendid isolation, with no beta to be released before its timeBazaar: a great babbling bazaar of differing agendas and approaches
  8. 8. Cathedral BazaarStandards-based OrganicCollaborative CompetitiveTaxonomies Natural Language Processing
  9. 9. Records 3200 BCPhysical Human Archive/ Record ProcessObject/ Notes Destroy Event Human Action
  10. 10. Records – machine basedPhysical Machine Archive/ Record ProcessObject/ Data Destroy Event Machine Action
  11. 11. Metadata Data on, in,Physical Machine about theObject/ Data Event object/event
  12. 12. Pull – Semantic Web Acid Test1. Is it semantic? 1. Are the terms unambiguous? 2. Are they tagged in a royalty-free format, governed by a non-profit institution, that all software programs can understand?2. Is it on the web? 1. Is it online using a common name space that makes it easily findable? 2. Is it shared between collaborators and companies? 3. Does it use the information already online to get smarter as more people use the system?
  13. 13. Turn of thescrew
  14. 14. The Machine ScrewPrinciple discovered around 400 BCLimited use until machine tools made mass production possible (18th cent.)Every machine shop and foundry made unique sizes and thread dimensions1841: Joseph Whitworth presented “The Uniform System of Screw- Threads” to Britain‟s Institute of Civil Engineers1864: William Sellers proposes “On a Uniform System of Screw Threads” to the Franklin Institute, PhiladelphiaEnabled interchangeable parts and tooling for mechanization and mass production1945: British and American standards merged
  15. 15. A successful standard on
  16. 16. ISO 216 Communications StandardGlobalization starts with getting the details right. Inconsistent use of SI units and international standard paper sizes remain today a primary cause for U.S. businesses failing to meet the expectations of customers worldwideMarcus Kuhn, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory
  17. 17. German standard DIN 476 in 1922, and soon introduced in many other countries, Belgium (1924), Netherlands (1925), Norway (1926), Switzerland (1929), Sweden (1930), Soviet Union (1934), Hungary (1938), Italy (1939), Uruguay (1942), Argentina (1943), Brazil (1943), Spain (1947), Austria (1948), Romania (1949), Japan (1951), Denmark (1953), Czechoslovakia (1953), Israel (1954), Portugal (1954), Yugoslavia (1956), India (1957), Poland (1957), United Kingdom (1959), Venezuela (1962), New Zealand (1963), Iceland (1964), Mexico (1965), South Africa (1966), France (1967), Peru (1967), Turkey (1967), Chile (1968), Greece (1970), Zimbabwe (1970), Singapore (1970), Bangladesh (1972), Thailand (1973), Barbados (1973), Australia (1974), Ecuador (1974), Columbia (1975) and Kuwait (1975). It finally became both an international standard (ISO 216) as well as the official United Nations format in 1975 and it is today used in almost all countries on this planet, leaving North America as the only remaining exception.
  18. 18. Taxonomies Physical Machine Archive/ Record Process Object/ Data Destroy EventRules to Machinerepresent the Actiondata
  19. 19. XML (Deloitte, 2010)
  20. 20. Acord XML Dictionary
  21. 21. XBRLeXtensible Business Reporting Language“a free XML-based specification that uses accepted financial reporting standards and practices to exchange financial statements across all software and technologies, including the internet”AICPA led, with 30+ sponsors including Big 5, software vendors, ICAEW, IBMwww.xbrl.orgConceived in April 1998 Charles Hoffman, a CPA with the firm Knight Vale and Gregory in Tacoma, WashingtonOctober 2, 1998, AICPA agreed to fund the project to create a prototype
  22. 22. XBRL.. a standard for the electronic exchange ofdata between businesses and on theinternet. Under XML, identifying tags areapplied to items of data so that they can beprocessed efficiently by computer software.
  23. 23. Taxonomies (Deloitte, 2010)
  24. 24. Semantic Web Stack
  25. 25. Related TechnologiesTaggingRFIDM2MRemote ControlDigital to Analogue
  26. 26. M2M
  27. 27. Openness and transparency
  28. 28. ConclusionTechology already existsNot necessarily economic yetStandards are centralConflicting stakeholder interestsVendors will continue to oppose standardsProfessions will be central to the open standards without which Web 3.0 will be stifled