semantic


Semantic Web Light Beer

Image by davidflanders via Flickr

This was to be a pre-conference post to give an overview of what to expect during the week-long, 150-or-so session Semantic Technologies Conference – a gathering of all things semantic.

I wanted to mention a few “views” by which you can consider the landscape, to help navigate the more than 150 sessions:

  • Sector / Industry (such as e-gov, health/life science and pharma, publishing, financial…)
  • By stack-/layer-cake component (the individual technology or standard)
  • By function performed (search, data integration, dynamic categorization…
  • Technical Level – from highly technical, to purely business focused
    W3c semantic web stack

    Image via Wikipedia

And there are related “tracks” that can help you follow any one of these. Whether you’re interested in what the Semantic Web is in general, intricate architectural aspects of the various segments of the semantic web layer cake/stack (RDF, OWL, SPARQL…), it’ll be covered during the week.

Since it is now under way, I’ll mention a few of the points made during the Semantic-Link live podcast on Sunday, an opening sessions that I was part of.  In particular, I wanted to touch on the “Advice to new attendees” (who represented a surprisingly massive portion of those who had already checked in for the week) included [full mp3 here]:

  • Talk to anyone about anything.  This is an extremely diverse, giving, open and accessible group of people.  (Andraz Tori of Zemanta added: while it is great to see people you haven’t seen in a year, don’t talk to the ones you know.  Meet and talk with new ones!).
  • Try to sample from the uniquely WIDE variety of topical material covered.  It is rare that you’ll find the range of material that is accessible.
  • Don’t try to get deeply into the intricacies of each component of the stack.  Instead, get enough of a sense of how each of the components relates to one another – so you can then consider the context of anything you encounter here.
  • Don’t be afraid to walk out of a session you determine is not for you, and head into another you were considering.
  • Value the hallway conversations as much as the sessions themselves.
  • Decide whether you are trying to learn everything and anything you can – or if you are seeking out specific solutions or material to justify an agenda – and navigate accordingly.

One topic released too recently to be on the agenda, is the schema.org arrangement between Google, Bing and Yahoo around the common use the Microdata vocabulary (vs RDFa or Microformats), which is less expressive and easier to implement.  The question put out during the opening panel discussion was whether this good, bad, important, unimportant… to the Semantic Web community.  The only consensus of the panel was that it will generate much discussion on all sides of the matter during the week – and that is a good thing.  Christine Connors added that the SEO world will likely jump on this standardization for annotating – and a cottage industry might emerge around people offering to annotate pages.   From my own relatively non-technical perspective, it is strategically positive for the Semantic Web.  To the extent that this opens up the floodgates and generates masses of annotation, there is then much more to be worked with, for RDFa to be added where higher degrees of expressiveness are still desired – and these will surely emerge.

Enhanced by Zemanta

This is an update to the Drupal-related portion of my 2/7/11 post:

Semantic Web Bus or Semantic Web Bandwagon?

Image by dullhunk via Flickr

Stéphane Corlosquet posted some background regarding his research, and a link to his masters thesis, on and paving (or at least mapping) the way to inclusion of RDFa in Drupal 7.

The latter does a good job outlining the matter being addressed — in a a pretty digestible way even for the lay person — along with the way to get there.  Of particular note is the emphasis on facilitating the leveraging of it, as evidenced by the existence of its Chapter 4, focused on usability and adoption.

After all, this effort finally represents the technical equipping of content — through the work flow and processes of non-technicians  to generate that content — so as to be technically consumed.  This is how most of our every day systems operate (think about the behind-the-scenes code that is incorporated into Word, for example, when the bold or italics button is pressed.

Once we arrived at the participatory phase of the Web, this type of invisible facilitation/enablement within everyday processes — in a usable way, no less — became an essential pathway to its semanticization.

Artist's impression of the US Gerald R. Ford-c...

Image via Wikipedia - (turning the big ship)

Enhanced by Zemanta

Image representing Drupal as depicted in Crunc...

Image via CrunchBase

I’m finally getting a break from chipping ice and shoveling snow, so before the next round comes in, I wanted to get this post up about our second episode of the Semantic Link podcast.

A hen chicken (Gallus gallus)

Image via Wikipedia

In brief, we had an interesting discussion around how we anticipate Drupal 7 will impact the landscape and why – specifically its built-in ability to generate semantic annotation of content. To date there has been a chicken-and-egg situation, where the development of semantic-consuming applications has been waiting for consumable content – while efforts to generate semantic content have been awaiting the incentive of there being systems to consume, digest, and expose it. Call it CM-antics or C-Mantics – either way it is easier than saying “CM Semantics” – but perhaps it’ll reduce some of the antics.

Some green and a brown egg standing on end wit...

Image via Wikipedia

Other parts of the conversation included discussion of how semantic solutions find their way into companies; and about the way that semantics has influenced the division of labor and the definition of IT roles within companies (CTO vs CIO) due to its changing the nature of information itself, and making it more of a technology – or part of the machine itself.
Other parts of the conversation included discussion of how semantic solutions find their way into companies; and about the way that semantics has influenced the division of labor and the definition of IT roles within companies (CTO vs CIO) due to its changing the nature of information itself, and making it more of a technology – or part of the machine itself.

The logo used by Apple to represent Podcasting

Image via Wikipedia

Give a listen, and enjoy: Semantic Link – Episode 2

Enhanced by Zemanta

Symbol for languages. Based on Image:Gnome-glo...Image via Wikipedia

If this isn’t one of the coolest things you’ve ever seen…

You probably thought it was Jetson’s material that someone could speak one language into a phone, and you could hear it in a different language on the other end.  Pretty great stuff, translation on the fly.  Think about looking at something that is written in a different language, and being able to able to see it in another, without having to go look it up somewhere!

That’s exactly what the Word Lens app from Quest Visual does – which you’ve got to see to believe (if not understand)!

I don’t know if this is exactly right, but “bastante salvaje” if you ask me!

Enhanced by Zemanta

'Ida' fossil - the Missing LinkImage by Ragnar Singsaas via Flickr

What do you get when you cross a set of technologies with an evangelist, a community activist, a business strategist, a Hungarian from the W3C, an ontologist / library scientist, a standards expert, a seasoned Internet executive, and a Slovenian entrepreneur?

Hopefully, what you get is an interesting discussion.  Eric Franzon from SemanticWeb.com and Paul Miller of  Cloud of Data have organized just such a cross-section of participants for a monthly discussion – The Semantic Link podcast series – on things Semantic and/or Linked – from multiple perspectives.

King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table...Image via Wikipedia

I had the honor of being included at the table, and at this week’s inaugural conference call and Semantic Link podcast, we covered our different thoughts on the highlights for the space over the past year, and our hopes and dreams for the year to come.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Complementary anglesImage via Wikipedia: Complementary Angles

Since Tony Shaw wrote his post about their motivations and intentions in selling the SemTech Conference and Semantic Universe, some others have asked what I was thinking by having proposed it in the first place.  That’s actually pretty easy to explain.

In my initial post about the deal, I touched on my sense that the WebMediaBrands approach to the space, and its efforts to date, complemented what Tony was doing with SemTech.  Sure, they both focused on similar material, and involved many of the same cast of characters, but the interesting part was in their individual strategies and execution.

As background: Outside the more academically focused ISWC, SemTech had pretty much become the annual convention for the community, a good part of which was about migration to the business potential of these technologies.  The energy caught the attention of what was then Jupiter Media, who saw the opportunity to focus right in on what outside business was looking for: how to leverage these capabilities for competitive advantage.

SemTech too was looking to help answer that question – but was doing so within the context of fostering that community and its discovery, with programs structured to focus on sector-specific application.  Jupiter came from the other direction, with the LinkedData Planet conference asking right off, how business can make use, which they sustained in the subsequent Web3.0 Conference, under WebMedia’s Mediabistro.

It is the underlying approaches of the organizers that shines a light on the potential synergies here – the complementary angles – and the benefits should manifest outside the organizers themselves.  The modus operandi in the case of the SemTech organizers has been methodical community building, across academics, standards and business, while that for WebMedia is vertical integration of offerings for their consumption.  So the thinking was that SemTech’s introspective contemplation of the question, and WebMedia’s pragmatic approach would yield brass tacks.

68/365 - TackImage by Niharb via Flickr

To put a shine on those tacks, combining of the big SemTech event with WebMedia’s year-round and multi-pronged focus-within-the-vertical should also help wash away a subtle but present “us versus them” undercurrent from among participants.  For today, the community can ignore any “which team” questions, or what “it” (Semantic Web, Linked Data, Web 3.0, Web of Data) should be called, and who coined which terms.  As one, the combined efforts can focus on furtherance – for interoperability, efficiency, usefulness…  Perhaps we’ll see the first signs of this happening at this week’s Semantic Web Summit, in Boston.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Datasets in the Linking Open Data project, as ...Image via Wikipedia

Wow.  If you thought the Linking Open Data cloud had grown between September 2007 (right) and July of 2009 (below), take a look at this to see where we are NOW!

Instance linkages within the Linking Open Data...Image via Wikipedia

As Richard and Anja note on the site linked above: The cloud images show “some of the datasets that have been published in Linked Data format, by the Linking Open Data community project and other organisations.

Where is this going? Andreas Blumauer of Semantic Web Company, in Vienna, put it well: “15 years ago we all were excited when we published HTML for the first time and it didn’t take a long time until all of us were “on the internet”. Now we are starting to publish data on the web. Based on semantic web technologies professional data management will be possible in distributed environments generating even more network effects than Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 ever did.”

Some might ask where value derived from this cloud, or if membership in it just marketing?  Talis’ Tom Heath outlines, in the latest issue of Nodalities Magazine, that without Linked Data, there couldn’t be a Semantic Web.  Being linked and of use means having been made available following Linked Data Principles.  This includes: things having unique identifiers (URIs); that are in the form of hypertext (HTTP) so they are standardly navigable (dereferencable); at which destinations there is useful and standardly interprable information (in RDF/XML) describing the thing; and which contains links to other things (read: HTTP URIs which also contain RDF/XML).  Through explanation of the progression from FOAF files, (where the “things” at these “URIs” are individual people, collectively representing the basis for semantic social networks), to working out standards around what constitutes an information vs non-information resource (via httpRange-14), Tom makes the all important point that: each step along the way is an essential building block toward where we are going.

And where (at this stage) is this?  When Tony Shaw, of Semantic Universe, pointed to Linked Data in his recent article “Nine Ways the Semantic Web Will Change Marketing“, he was pointing to its impact on Marketing.  But beyond that, we can take from his explanation the broader capabilities afforded by it: findability, pullability, mashability, mobility – essentially interoperability, as applicable to any activity, sector or function which involves information (read: data).  Can you think of any that don’t?

Enabling data in this way (with all these building blocks) is “one” thing – moving control closer to the end user, and toward solutions and value.  Making it “usable” is yet another.  Every interaction is marketing (good or bad) for the resources of the interaction.  The opportunity this points to is, through the leveraging of those capabilties, to improve the experience around deriving those solutions and achieving that value.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Image representing WebMediaBrands as depicted ...Image via CrunchBase

Today, WebMediaBrands announced that it acquired the Semantic Technology Conference (SemTech) and Semantic Universe.  SemTech has been the main non-academic annual gathering for the Semantic Technology space for six years thus far.  In the past few years, WebMediaBrands has also been active in the space, with its SemanticWeb and MediaBistro arms, and its organizing of related events including the Web3.0 Conference and before that, LinkedData Planet.

Semantic Technology ConferenceImage via Flickr

W3c semantic web stackImage via Wikipedia

  The combination of WebMediaBrands’ year-round focus on the space (through regional and sub-sector targeted events), with the annual convention that SemTech has been, should result in driving the space forward.  Together, their now complementary efforts should facilitate momentum on the commercial side of the space.  Perhaps we’ll also see the development of some useful industry-wide resources, as a result.

Update: Press release from Semantic Universe

Enhanced by Zemanta

Early in my career, when working as a data jockey with an economic consulting firm, I was on a team for a particular project where, I’ll always remember, we were referred to (in the New York Times) as “nitpicking zealots”.  While I knew it was meant as a criticism, I took the reference then (as now, for that matter), as a complement – emphasizing the attention-to-detail in our analysis.

The American manual alphabet in photographsImage via Wikipedia

For me, that focus has long been coupled with heavy emphasis on usefulness (ok, and logic) as a driving factor in doing or creating anything.  “Stick-in-mud” – maybe.  “Drive you nuts” – sure, the family says this sometimes…  But things just need to make sense.

So it shouldn’t surprise me (or anyone else) that, in my recent Experience Design mini-masters  project, I had an overriding need for the product idea my team was to come up with, to be of real use and value.  The first task was to evaluate whether design principles had been followed in the creation of a particular product (the Roadmaster – a single-line scrolling text display for use on a car).  Then we were to apply these design principles to come up with a different product/application making use of the technology for the context.  We performed our review by considering the Roadmaster’s affordances (what the design suggested about its use); its mapping of controls to meaning or functionality;  whether it provided feedback during use; its conceptual model and obviousness of purpose; any forcing functions, limters or defaults.  Having developed a “sense” of the product, as it was, we were embarked on the design effort by adding interviews/surveys to gather research on potential market need/desire.

Without getting into our conclusions about the Roadmaster product itself, of particular interest is where we ended up going with our design as a result of performing our own contextual inquiry.  Some great ideas emerged among the different teams, for which each team prototyped their design (using Axure), performed usability testing, and presented results.  Most of the teams designed mainly for social-media driven applications.  With our own goals including not just usability, but the usefulness factor mentioned above, we discovered potential in re-purposing the device – to be directed not to other drivers, but to the driver of the vehicle in which it is installed.  Specifically, to aid hearing impaired drivers – whether for receiving guidance from a driving instructor, instructions from a gps, or conversing with a passenger.

The design, which at one point we dubbed the “iDrive” (for reasons that will reveal themselves), involves mounting of the scrolling text display out in front of and facing the driver, and integration of speach-to-text conversion, so that as words were spoken, the driver would see these words displayed out in front of them, without their having to turn to see the hands or lips of a person commnicating with them, nor would they have to look away from the road to read directions on a gps screen.  In its simplest form, the design calls for an iPhone (or similar) application to perform the voice-to-text conversion, transmitting the resulting text to the display for the driver.  An extension of this concept could incorporate detection and display of other sounds, such as a honk, and which direction it is coming from. Since the program, we’ve found that the required voice-to-text conversion capability, in a mobile app (e.g. for the iPhone) as we called for in the design, does exist, so with the combination of the technologies (display, conversion, mobile application, and gps capability), the serving the hearing-impaired-driver market in this way should be within reach.

A side-note to this post: The faculty of the UXD program, Dr. Marilyn Tremaine, Ronnie Battista, and Dr. Alan Milewski, helped to revealed for me that the formal processes of experience design, and particularly contextual inquiry, parallel closely with what I’ve sought to achieve through the joining of the disciplines of Usability, Value Network Analysis (perspectival), and a dash of Semantic (extensible and interoperable) thinking.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Day 191: Sticky Notes Mean ProductivityImage by quinn.anya via Flickr

If you haven’t already encountered Google’s newly released Sidewiki, it is a web annotation feature accessible via browser plug-in or their toolbar – and is essentially a means for people to comment on pages and, unlike tools for making notes for just yourself (like sticky notes on your screen, or the electronic equivalent), these comments are visible to others who use it and visit those pages – right on the page with the content.  This isn’t a new concept, but one that gives cause to consider the “traditional” dimensions of web experience.Generally speaking, users of web resources have typically thought of the pages they view as being depicted in the way intended by the owner of the domain (or page).  If we want to get philosophical, ownership of the rendering of the page, it could be argued, is the user’s – and plug-ins empower such customization, as this is referred to.

Image representing Google as depicted in Crunc...Image via CrunchBase

Similarly, functionality of a site is has typically been considered by users to be provided/delivered by, and/or controlled by the site owner.  In the context of beginning to think of rendering as being other-webly (i.e. from other than the provider), the same holds true with respect to functionality.  The functionality being added to the experience here is around the ability to comment, and to see comments of others, about the page.

This starts to bring home the concept that the browser is acting as the actual platform, rather than the page/site itself.  In this case, we’re talking about the bringing together of the page’s content with toughts or opinions about the page – or about things that are on the page.  So in essence, what sidewiki adds is a virtualized forum – where the forum content is in the hands of Google rather than those of the owner of the site – but is displayed alongside the content itself.

Image representing AdaptiveBlue as depicted in...Image via CrunchBase

This is not altogether different from what AdaptiveBlue’s Glue does – though there are a couple of key difference.  In both cases the user must be using the plug-in in order to see or add content – akin to joining the community.  And in both cases the comment / opinion content that is generated as a result, is in the control of the plug-in provider.  The first, and most notable difference (for now, at least) is that sidewiki “acts” as if the user generated content is about the page which it annotates, while Glue’s emphasis is on the asset to which the page refers.  The key benefit of the latter, in the cases where the commentary relates to an asset referenced on the page, is that it decouples the item referred to from location which makes reference to it.  This translates to Glue displaying  the comment on any page in where the same item is found, as opposed to just being seen on the same page where the comment was made.  This difference won’t likely persist, and seems more a matter of emphasis/focus and positioning.

Since the annotations are only visible to users making use of the particular service used when making the annotations, the more of these services we see, the more fragmented the sea of commentary.  The next level may be about “aboutness”, and differentiation by the ability to determine relatedness of otherwise unassociated commentary and content – and making the virtual connection between the two for the user.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

« Previous PageNext Page »

Clicky Web Analytics