[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re:

• To: "K. Ari Krupnikov" <ari@c...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)
• From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@m...>
• Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2004 20:55:36 -0700
• Thread-index: AcRM4uPSLc0lqs8xSauv7CBobPMdHAAJ/+1Q
• Thread-topic: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)

> The problem with proprietary, ahem, ecosystems is that some 
> arbitrary entity decides who gets a chance and who doesn't. 

You're missing the point.  With Google, you only get indexed the
metadata that they permit you to index.  Period.  It's the opposite of
open.  Of course, they'll index any *document*, but the metadata is
completely closed.  That's the point; it's a walled garden.  The
semantic web is about completely open metadata, not a walled garden.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)
    • From: Bill de hÓra <bill.dehora@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Conformance Testing and Schemas (WAS RE: The triples da tamodel -- was Re: Sema ntic Web permathread,iteration n+1 )
• Next by Date: Re: Bruce Perens and yet more patents
• Previous by thread: Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)
• Next by thread: Re: Semantic Web permathread, iteration n+1 (was Re: InfoWorld agrees with Elliote Rusty Harold)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread