Seconded!! On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 12:47 PM Samuel Klein <[email protected]> wrote:
> Wow :) Thanks for that, Dan! > > On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 11:43 AM Dan Brickley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 at 11:58, Jan Dittrich <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I would be very interested in Wikidatas Relation to Cyc >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyc> on one hand and the semantic Web on >>> the other. >>> >> >> this isn’t written down in one place well, yet >> >> Here is one strand of history, emphasising from Cyc via Guha’s later work >> on MCF. >> >> CycL inspired Apple MCF, which got XMLified by Tim Bray when Guha took it >> Netscape. June ‘97 it was submitted to W3C by Netscape. It combined with >> requirements from W3C content labeling work (PICS), where there was >> interest in adding more decentralized expressivity (eg to support Dublin >> Core and other schemas being combined in one “label”), complex structures >> and datatyped property values, aka Signed PICS labels and PICS-NG. While >> PICS and PICS-NG had an s-expression based syntax, RDF (like the 1997 >> iteration of MCF) went with XML. At the time XML was being invented by >> stripping SGML down into something that might suit the Web. Microsoft >> submitted XML-Data to W3C mid 97 too (as well as later a revision, breaking >> W3C etiquette). XML-Data shared some goals with RDF but not its graph data >> model. RDF and other usecases led to XML Namespaces being an important >> thing. As XML popularity grew, RDF was under pressure since it didn’t >> engage much with the SGML heritage. The RDFS WG launched just after the RDF >> Model + Syntax spec was announced at Dublin Core’s conference in Finland. >> This being the “browser wars” era both RDF and RDFS were under huge >> pressure to be completed quickly. RDFS included a small subset of the >> schema-defining machinery from MCF. The RDF M+S WG produced an RDF >> recommendation in Feb 1999 but RDFS was left in limbo, in part because the >> XML community were wary of being forced to build XML Schema on top of it. >> Meanwhile from 1998 a small but enthusiastic community started to build >> around RDF - experimenting with query languages, databases, integration >> with inference engines, APIs etc., alongside continued support from >> Netscape who used the technology heavily for everything from RSS feeds, >> sitemaps, “whats related” annotation services, open data (dmoz) dumps, to >> their own browser’s internal data source APIs (xul templates, bookmarks, >> mail, ..). On the standards track, W3C management backed off from RDF work >> to reflect the concerns of its membership, who tended to much prefer XML. >> Meanwhile the US military research agency DARPA had been persuaded by an >> academic turned staffer (Jim Hendler) who had worked on similar early >> technology (SHOE, PIQ) that they should fund research to standardize a >> DARPA Agent Markup Language. A DAML / W3C collaboration led to the >> RDF-oriented W3C team at MIT receiving DARPA funding to continue the work >> area that had not engaged the XML-centric interest of W3C’s membership (ie >> Advisory Committee). Alongside this, RDF/S had engaged the interests of >> European researchers working around logic-based KR languages, eg f-logic, >> description logics etc., resulting in DAML (US) and OIL (description logic >> EU research project outcomes) collaborating via adhoc transatlantic >> committee to produce DAML+OIL, a first draft of a more complicated language >> that sat on top of RDF. The W3C MIT DARPA funding supported a “Semantic Web >> Advanced Development” activity that operated in the grey around of W3C’s >> “non member-funded activity”, and which served in particular to bring >> DAML+OIL into W3C as new work item. This next phase of RDF work at W3C was >> broadly in line with the RDF roadmap and expectations from the 1997 >> Metadata Activity, but rebranded “Semantic Web” to reflect several >> considerations. Firstly that RDF was clearly more powerful and expressive >> than a simple metadata format might need. Secondly, by this point RDF was >> pretty unpopular in several contexts - and seen as draining staff resources >> and attention from W3C membership priorities (XML, Web Services, etc.). >> Renaming from RDF allowed a fresh start. Calling it Semantic Web tied into >> Tim-BL’s interest and writing in the area, had more “visionary” feel, >> allowing for a message that it was a longer term investigation, therefore >> not a competitor to XML Schema, SOAP, Xquery and so on. So now we had PICS >> and MCF having mutated into RDF/S for graph data, and then simultaneously a >> rebranding of the exercise as Semantic Web, with a big dose of “futuristic” >> and “researchy”. Conferences and journals and such started to appear, >> initially with much more focus on the “semantics” part, rather than the >> “web”. This was the cause for the second great half-hearted renaming, which >> grew from the growing split between those of us who were in this for >> web-based data sharing, integration, feeds, sitemaps, rss, foaf etc and so >> on, and those who were more “semantics first”, with a passion for finding >> efficient subsets of Description Logic. Around the mid-2000s the earlier >> experimental RDF query languages solidified into SPARQL, which was broadly >> in the “data access” side of the community. This is another place that the >> Cyc and MCF heritage showed up, since most practical RDF systems had a >> notion of source or context attached at the triple of graph level, >> corresponding to the notion of “layers” in MCF (and very loosely with cyc >> contexts). So this kind of takes us to the time when we had rdf/s, owl, >> skos, sparql … and things like dbpedia and the lod cloud were refining the >> data-linking “hypertext rdf” work we’d started in the FOAF project, with a >> TimBL-fueled passion for every entity being given a URI that can serve up >> RDF when dereferenced. A good amount of public open datasets were published >> this way, although applications and usage tended to lag. This brings us to >> the era of rich snippets, Google acquiring Freebase, renaming it Knowledge >> Graph and then stepping back from the role that Wikidata was more effective >> at filling… >> >> >> Ok that was a giant biased brain dump, but i think mostly true, and about >> 25 years underdocumented history squeezed into a paragraph >> >> Dan >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> Jan >>> >>> Am Fr., 23. Juli 2021 um 01:57 Uhr schrieb Denny Vrandečić < >>> [email protected]>: >>> >>>> Hi Thad, >>>> >>>> Thanks for asking the questions, and thanks Tobi for the pointers. Man, >>>> what a lengthy post it was. >>>> >>>> I understand that the post answered most of your questions. I think >>>> that it is entirely possible to layer a prototype semantics over Wikidata, >>>> just as the DL semantics have been layered over it. I don't remember if >>>> such work has been done before. >>>> >>>> Regarding ISO 5964, I think I probably have looked through it at some >>>> point, but I don't remember it anymore. SKOS has certainly been a stronger >>>> influence, and obviously OWL. >>>> >>>> I hope that helps with the historical deep dive :) Lydia and I really >>>> should write that book! >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Denny >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 3:00 PM Thad Guidry <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> *Tobi - *That blog post 3 is very helpful. It shows that Denny and I >>>>> think alike and agree on everything. :-) His dislike for strong >>>>> classification. >>>>> Which is part of my basis, to allow weak relations much more. And use >>>>> them. But how to allow them, and I think the only way is through >>>>> properties based on the Data Model currently. >>>>> There are many ways, and SKOS is one way to allow expressing weak >>>>> relations and we already have some good support with existing properties >>>>> like P4390 mapping relation type >>>>> <https://www.wikidata.org/entity/P4390> and a host of others. >>>>> >>>>> Denny and I also fear the same things, like not having a flexible >>>>> enough system to describe our complex world that doesn't always fit into >>>>> strict rules. Which is kinda why I've always liked >>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-primer/#secassociative >>>>> because of it's non-transitivity which allows much flexibility and as >>>>> he and I would say... avoid "Barbara". :-) >>>>> Which is pretty much summarized in >>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-primer/#secadvanced >>>>> >>>>> Sorry for all the SKOS links but semantic relations helps to describe >>>>> human knowledge. How a system represents or portrays semantic relations >>>>> is >>>>> where choices are made or have been made. *And I think the right >>>>> choices were definitely made.* >>>>> Overlaying SKOS and the Wikidata properties that sprinkle it into the >>>>> data model is useful, but I've always been kind of reluctant to do >>>>> that...probably for the same reasons Denny might give? Choices between >>>>> allowing "semantic accuracy" versus "semantic flexibility". But I think >>>>> systems like SKOS provide both. Perhaps it could be argued that OWL >>>>> provides much less. :-) Still all KOSs provide great use when they fit >>>>> well. How they can fit over Wikidata, as I said, is probably only through >>>>> properties at this late stage of design and that's fine with me! >>>>> >>>>> Still, my main focus is and always will be trying to add human >>>>> knowledge about concept relations into Wikidata to help machines, to help >>>>> us. (the "edges" that humans quickly can deduce in seconds, but still to >>>>> this day can sometimes take machines days or weeks to figure out). >>>>> >>>>> My usage and help to Abstract Wikipedia and Wikidata later on will >>>>> primarily be around the mapping of relations ... where a lot of the >>>>> possibilities have already been described years and years ago at the very >>>>> bottom of this long page: >>>>> *inter-KOS mapping relationships <-- *very last row, 3rd column >>>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-primer/#seccorrespondencesISO >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *Denny - * were you part of or lightly influenced by ISO 5964 through >>>>> Germany ISO DIN or not .. that also would be good to know. >>>>> >>>>> Thad >>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/ >>>>> https://calendly.com/thadguidry/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 3:17 PM Tobi Gritschacher < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> It would be nice to have a place to look with a link to a page in the >>>>>>> Community portal that says "History of Wikidata's design and early >>>>>>> collected meetings, notes, design documents, recordings" >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Might not answer your concrete question, but here are some (very) >>>>>> early blog posts by Denny. They are still a nice read. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> 1/3 >>>>>> https://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/02/22/restricting-the-world/ >>>>>> >>>>>> 2/3 >>>>>> https://newwwblog.wikimedia.de/2013/06/04/on-truths-and-lies/ >>>>>> >>>>>> 3/3 >>>>>> https://blog.wikimedia.de/2013/09/12/a-categorical-imperative/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, Tobi >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jan Dittrich >>> UX Design/ Research >>> >>> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin >>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Tempelhofer+Ufer+23-24+%7C+10963+Berlin?entry=gmail&source=g> >>> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0 >>> https://wikimedia.de >>> >>> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der >>> Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei! >>> https://spenden.wikimedia.de >>> >>> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. >>> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter >>> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für >>> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> > > > -- > Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > -- David McDonell Co-founder & CEO ICONICLOUD, Inc. "Illuminating the cloud" M: 703-864-1203 EM: [email protected] URL: http://iconicloud.com
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
