Semantic Web Part I: The Data
The best and the brightest Internet-oriented minds, of people like Sir Tim Berners-Lee, are talking about the Semantic Web and Web 3.0, but most of us either shut off or shut down when we hear the terms. They’re simply so nebulous that it’s easier to reject them by saying that they’re ‘mere hype’. I’ve already had a crack or two at it, but I’m still mulling the concepts over, and I’m going to give it another go here.
First, let’s review what we mean by Web 3.0. There are lots of theories out there, including a web that allows read-write-execute or one that is always on and controllable.
For purposes of this post, I’m going with Sir Tim Berners-Lee’s Semantic Web definition. Essentially, the Semantic Web is comprised of data, rather than documents. The difference may seem subtle, but it’s profound.
The Word Web
When information is on the web in the form of documents, the users rely on a programmer or developer having put information together in a certain way. I can use this blog to demonstrate what I mean:
3+3=6
I’ve just written that, and if you happened to want to know what 3+3 is you’d be in luck, but if you wanted 3×3, oh well. Because it’s text and not data, you are relying on what I wrote and have no option to adapt it to your needs.
If you write a formula in Microsoft Word, like 3+3=6, you can search for it, but you can’t do anything with it. You can’t change it to 3×3 or 3-3. You can’t take the result and apply further calculations to it. You’re pretty much stuck with what you’ve got.
In the post I referred to above, I included a video of Berners-Lee describing the Semantic Web, in which he uses the example of coffee shops in the neighborhood. In the Word version of the Web, I wait until someone has compiled a list, or overlaid little coffee mug icons on a map, and then I can reference the information. But I can’t just decide to switch to nightclubs; for that, I have to wait until someone compiles another list, or overlays little DJ icons on a map, or whatever.
The Excel Web
If you wanted to manipulate numbers, you wouldn’t use Word; you’d use Excel. You’d break your information down into little bits so you can put the numbers together however you want. This is the same concept Tim Berners-Lee is talking about with RDF (the Resource Description Framework).
If we were just talking about numbers, then Excel would give us all the manipulation power we need. But on the Web we’re not just talking about numbers; we’re talking about information. So perhaps a better analogy is a database program like Access.
Word=no manipulation.
Excel=moderate manipulation.
Access=massive manipulation.
The Access Web
Those of you who use Access know that it is not an intuitive program. If you’ve got no experience with relational databases, you’re likely to have no idea what you’re looking at and no concept that the structural decisions you make at the beginning can have a big impact on what you’re able to do at the end. But you’ll also know how powerfully you can manipulate the data, at a moment’s notice, on an enormous scale, without running into those problems you do in Excel (’OMG, I sorted my data and now all of my VLOOKUPS don’t work!)
If information is on the web as data, it becomes infinitely accessible. You can add it, multiply it, overlay it, correlate it… manipulate it however you want. You can switch from coffee shops to nightclubs.
The Interface
In order for Access to be useful to mere mortals and not just the technogeek gods, we have to construct forms and pre-saved queries and user interfaces. Having that much data and that much ability to manipulate can be messy. Same with the Semantic Web. In Part II, I’ll talk about the interface, which is where VortexDNA comes in.
Do you think this is a reasonable explanation? Too simplistic? Delightful? Misinformed? I welcome your comments.
