[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: A Few Thoughts on an Ontology as a Self Organizing System
--- Bill_de_hÓra <bill.dehora@p...> wrote: > And unfairly, I could twist your > argument as being > equally against relational data, though I'm sure > that's not your intention :) Uhh, not my intention, but the comparison is apt. Relational data assumes that field values are from a domain of well-defined types, and a well-defined type is something very closely related to an ontology, AFAIK. RDF-ish ontology / inference systems can model semantic networks in a more natural (to ordinary folks) way than relational normalization and joining, but that's an implementation detail :-) So, I don't see much *conceptual* difference between "improve search by building ontologies" and "improve search by modelling all your concepts in relations", although I presume the semantic web will be more web-friendly! > > But think about FOAF, or calendaring - search > engines may be good at > determining the relative importance of some chunk of > data, but they > just couldn't begin to provide the sort of > information a naive graph > walker or inference engine could, given a set of > foaf graphs, iCal, and a party to organize. Sure, I agree. So long as one is talking about using a relatively small amount of hand-generated metadata to make inferences about, or remove or resort the mass of autmatically indexed data that a search engine uses, I have no quarrel. I just don't have much faith in the idea that that ontologies or hand-authored metadata in general can do the brunt of the work in searching the web.
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|