3 ms·

The semantic web is now integrated into the web and for the most part it's invisible. Take a look at the timeline given in this post: https://news.ycombinator.c

by irickt 12y ago

The semantic web is now integrated into the web and for the most part it's invisible. Take a look at the timeline given in this post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3983179 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3983179 Some of those startups exited for hundreds of millions, providing, for example, the metadata in the right hand pane of Google search. The new action buttons in Gmail, adopted by Github, are based on JSON-LD: https://github.com/blog/1891-view-issue-pull-request-buttons-for-gmail https://github.com/blog/1891-view-issue-pull-request-buttons... JSON-LD, which is a profound improvement on and compatible with the original RDF, is the only web metadata standard with a viable future. Read the reflections of Manu Sporny, who overwhelmed competing proposals and bad standards with sheer technical power: http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins-2/ http://manu.sporny.org/2014/json-ld-origins-2/ There's really no debate any more. We use the the technology borne by the "Semantic Web" every day.

charlysisto 12y ago
Thank you, that's precious info. I started exploring the tools last year an dug into rdf, feeling very uncomfortable with the buzz mismatch of "hey but everybody's using JSON ! that's not helping LD's adoption..." Happy to learn the issue seems to be addressed.
theoh 12y ago
This is a bit like saying we have colonised the moon because it's possible to buy astronaut ice cream. Sure, people working towards the semantic web vision have had partial successes, but overall it cannot be said to have arrived and become something invisible we use every day. Gmail actions are an _extremely_ basic bit of functionality compared to Berners-Lee's vision. See this recent article for example: http://semanticweb.com/keep-on-keepin-on_b41339 http://semanticweb.com/keep-on-keepin-on_b41339
mindcrime 12y ago
I agree with most of what you just said, but one nitpick: JSON-LD, which is a profound improvement on and compatible with the original RDF, I don't think this is right. JSON-LD is RDF. What it isn't is RDF/XML. But it's important to realize that RDF != RDF/XML. JSON-LD is just an encoding of the abstract RDF triple model in JSON, just like RDF/XML is an encoding of RDF into XML.
- rmc 12y ago
  There are several other encodings of rdf. Ntriples, turtle
  - mindcrime 12y ago
    Exactly. There's even another JSON encoding, RDF/JSON[1], but I don't think anybody uses it. [1]: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-json/index.html https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-json/index.h...
- irickt 12y ago
  JSON-LD is an extension of RDF. From the spec: "JSON-LD is a concrete RDF syntax as described in [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. Hence, a JSON-LD document is both an RDF document and a JSON document and correspondingly represents an instance of an RDF data model. However, JSON-LD also extends the RDF data model to optionally allow JSON-LD to serialize Generalized RDF Datasets. ..." Also, especially important is that it supports sets and lists, which RDF does not.
tree_of_item 12y ago
Are you saying JSON-LD is part of this "invisible" semantic web? Because that link says: >I’ve heard many people say that JSON-LD is primarily about the Semantic Web, but I disagree, it’s not about that at all. JSON-LD was created for Web Developers that are working with data that is important to other people and must interoperate across the Web. The Semantic Web was near the bottom of my list of “things to care about” when working on JSON-LD, and anyone that tells you otherwise is wrong. :P >TL;DR: The desire for better Web APIs is what motivated the creation of JSON-LD, not the Semantic Web. If you want to make the Semantic Web a reality, stop making the case for it and spend your time doing something more useful, like actually making machines smarter or helping people publish data in a way that’s useful to them.
irickt 12y ago
[I was not available to respond as this thread developed so I'm commenting "for the record" to several peers here.] I offered that link because gives the background that lead to a real, practical metadata standard. The "semantic web" has evolved to be linked data tied together on the public side with JSON-LD and on the private side by whatever implementation technologies. Manu beat incredible political odds to bring the basic intent of the semantic web forward. One strategy of the linked data community has been to distance itself from "semantic" because the word triggers such rage, as evidenced by the tone of argument in this topic. It is a mystery to me why these developers waste their time with straw-man hyperbole, offended by a decade old proposal. Those contributing to the "noise machine" are doing a disservice by casting doubt in the name of a no longer operational goal. With JSON-LD the "semantic web" won. JSON-LD is basic - the basis for whatever one wants to create with linked data. It is not "partial". It is comprehensive and superior to other metadata documents. It's the only solution worth adopting, and it's a standard. The opportunity, today, is linked metadata for day-to-day applications, which solves a real problem and is getting significant adoption.

by irickt 12y ago

charlysisto 12y ago

Thank you, that's precious info. I started exploring the tools last year an dug into rdf, feeling very uncomfortable with the buzz mismatch of "hey but everybody's using JSON ! that's not helping LD's adoption..." Happy to learn the issue seems to be addressed.

theoh 12y ago

This is a bit like saying we have colonised the moon because it's possible to buy astronaut ice cream. Sure, people working towards the semantic web vision have had partial successes, but overall it cannot be said to have arrived and become something invisible we use every day. Gmail actions are an _extremely_ basic bit of functionality compared to Berners-Lee's vision. See this recent article for example: http://semanticweb.com/keep-on-keepin-on_b41339 http://semanticweb.com/keep-on-keepin-on_b41339

mindcrime 12y ago

I agree with most of what you just said, but one nitpick: JSON-LD, which is a profound improvement on and compatible with the original RDF, I don't think this is right. JSON-LD is RDF. What it isn't is RDF/XML. But it's important to realize that RDF != RDF/XML. JSON-LD is just an encoding of the abstract RDF triple model in JSON, just like RDF/XML is an encoding of RDF into XML.

rmc 12y ago
There are several other encodings of rdf. Ntriples, turtle
- mindcrime 12y ago
  Exactly. There's even another JSON encoding, RDF/JSON[1], but I don't think anybody uses it. [1]: https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-json/index.html https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-json/index.h...
irickt 12y ago
JSON-LD is an extension of RDF. From the spec: "JSON-LD is a concrete RDF syntax as described in [RDF11-CONCEPTS]. Hence, a JSON-LD document is both an RDF document and a JSON document and correspondingly represents an instance of an RDF data model. However, JSON-LD also extends the RDF data model to optionally allow JSON-LD to serialize Generalized RDF Datasets. ..." Also, especially important is that it supports sets and lists, which RDF does not.

tree_of_item 12y ago

Are you saying JSON-LD is part of this "invisible" semantic web? Because that link says: >I’ve heard many people say that JSON-LD is primarily about the Semantic Web, but I disagree, it’s not about that at all. JSON-LD was created for Web Developers that are working with data that is important to other people and must interoperate across the Web. The Semantic Web was near the bottom of my list of “things to care about” when working on JSON-LD, and anyone that tells you otherwise is wrong. :P >TL;DR: The desire for better Web APIs is what motivated the creation of JSON-LD, not the Semantic Web. If you want to make the Semantic Web a reality, stop making the case for it and spend your time doing something more useful, like actually making machines smarter or helping people publish data in a way that’s useful to them.

irickt 12y ago

[I was not available to respond as this thread developed so I'm commenting "for the record" to several peers here.] I offered that link because gives the background that lead to a real, practical metadata standard. The "semantic web" has evolved to be linked data tied together on the public side with JSON-LD and on the private side by whatever implementation technologies. Manu beat incredible political odds to bring the basic intent of the semantic web forward. One strategy of the linked data community has been to distance itself from "semantic" because the word triggers such rage, as evidenced by the tone of argument in this topic. It is a mystery to me why these developers waste their time with straw-man hyperbole, offended by a decade old proposal. Those contributing to the "noise machine" are doing a disservice by casting doubt in the name of a no longer operational goal. With JSON-LD the "semantic web" won. JSON-LD is basic - the basis for whatever one wants to create with linked data. It is not "partial". It is comprehensive and superior to other metadata documents. It's the only solution worth adopting, and it's a standard. The opportunity, today, is linked metadata for day-to-day applications, which solves a real problem and is getting significant adoption.