
— DRAFT —
Talking Points for Semantic Web vs. Web2.0
Background
One of the main aspects of Web2.0, ie, that applications are based on
combining various type of data that are spread all around on the
Web, coincides with the very essence of the Semantic Web. What the SW
provides is a consistent model and tools for the definition and the usage of
qualified relationships among data on the Web. There are differences, of
course: Semantic Web is like Web 2.0 (in this respect) but with more general,
standardized, and possibly more expressive data models. In some
cases problem may get really hard and needs inferences, reasoning
services; but Web 2.0 will be able to seamlessly “upshift” to RDF
Schemas, SKOS, OWL, or Rules, making use of the greater expressibility of
those technologies. Which will continue the historical trend of putting
more smarts into the data so that code becomes simpler and
programmer’s time becomes more productive.
The big picture: imagine having one query language, one client, and one
data access protocol which let you arbitrarily slice the data of Flickr,
delicious, Google, and your favorite Web 2.0 sites, FOAF files, RSS 1.0
feeds — plus anything that can be mapped into RDF. This is data integration
the Web 2.0 and the Semantic Web way.
Similarities
Both Worlds
- focus on the data
- focus on intelligent data sharing, integration, combination (something
that the Semantic Web has been pushing for years)
- focus on using appropriate and specific data formats for
specific jobs; (e.g., RDF over bare XML for the SW, JSON or similar over
XML/XHTML for Web 2.0)
- focus on defining and using simple data formats
- focus on community based developments of common terminologies
- treat Web clients as first-class data consumers & producers
Differences
- the SW, when it becomes necessary, may use more complex formalisms
(like RDF Schemas, OWL, or Rules) and their related algorithms to solve
harder problems
- the SW puts a great emphasis on describing and defining the
relationships among data, which gets less focus in Web 2.0
- the SW is less focused on the human user experience, in
contrast to Web 2.0 that is also focused on user interface aspects
Some technologies on congruence
- RDF: gives a uniform data model for data combination and
interchange
- SPARQL: gives the SW and Web 2.0 a common data access language against
the RDF data model, with result formats in XML or JSON
- RDFa: that embeds SW data into documents, offering a more rigorous and
general alternative to microformats
- GRDDL: that provides a bridge between microformat type annotation of
content and/or RDFa on the one hand, and a general RDF formalism on the
other (thereby making it possible to combine, e.g., microformats with
SPARQL queries)
- AJAX components: provide the flexibility to combine dynamic Web 2.0
pages with the data combination tools like SPARQL interfaces
Kendall Clark & SW Coordination Group, edited by Ivan Herman $Revision:
1.5 $