Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Semantic Web 2.0

6,451 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Sex in your area is here: ❶❶❶ http://bit.ly/2F4cEJi ❶❶❶
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Dating direct: ❶❶❶ http://bit.ly/2F4cEJi ❶❶❶
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Semantic Web 2.0

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

×