Live data from Hacker News

The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

github.com

11–20 of 138 posts

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#11
Interesting writeup. I'm of the opinion that the problem of the naming issue (how to call "things"?) sits in the idea that going from structured documents to structured data is one abstraction level too deep (i.e., people don't agree on how to call "things"). I believe this can be solved by similarity search; if we can approximate the data and represent the structure in embeddings. Hopefully, this might be a step in the 2nd try, as mentioned in the MD :)

> It would be like wikipedia, but even more all encompassing, and far more transformational.

You might like to see this (https://weaviate.io/developers/weaviate/current/tutorials/se...) as a step in this direction because it contains the structured Wikipedia data and the embeddings to target individual nodes in the graph.

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#12

Semweb people got burned out by the stress of making new standards which means that standards haven't been updated. We've needed a SPARQL 2 for a long time but we're never going to get it. One thing I find interesting is that description logics (OWL) seem to have stayed a backwater in a time when progress in SAT and SMT solvers has been explosive.

A recent paper connects SHACL (mentioned in OP) to description logic and OWL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.06096 . This is a surprising link which seems to have been missed by SemWeb practitioners when SHACL was proposed.

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#13
JSON-LD has some traction, but the author seems to prefer a slightly different syntax.

I don't see a material difference, but I'm curious to know what others think.

-- https://w3c.github.io/json-ld-bp/#contexts

-- https://w3c.github.io/json-ld-bp/#example-example-typed-rela...

-- https://terminusdb.com/docs/index/terminusx-db/reference-gui...

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#15

Semweb people got burned out by the stress of making new standards which means that standards haven't been updated. We've needed a SPARQL 2 for a long time but we're never going to get it. One thing I find interesting is that description logics (OWL) seem to have stayed a backwater in a time when progress in SAT and SMT solvers has been explosive.

Wikidata is quite usable though with SPARQL through REST. To me the biggest problem seems lack of documentation but for small scale experiments interesting stuff can be done with it (with enough caching, probably with SQL). Running my own triple store seems a lot of work though, already choosing which one to use actually

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#16
Very cool topic... and not the article I was expecting!

I actively work with teams making sense of their massive global supply chains, manufacturing process, sprawling IT/IOT infra behavior, etc., and I personally bailed from RDF to bayesian models ~15 years ago... so I'm coming from a pretty different perspective:

* The historical killer apps for semantic web were historically paired with painfully manual taxonomization efforts. In industry, that's made RDF and friends useful... but mostly in specific niches like the above, and coming alongside pricey ontology experts. That's why I initially bailed years ago: outside of these important but niche domains, google search is way more automatic, general, and easy to use!

* Except now the tables have turned: Knowledge graphs for grounding AI. We're seeing a lot of projects where the idea is transformer/gnn/... knowledge graph. The publicly visible camp is folks sitting on curated systems like wikidata and osm, which have a nice back-and-forth. IMO the bigger iceberg is from AI tools getting easier colliding with companies having massive internal curated knowledge bases. I've been seeing them go the knowledge graph AI for areas like chemicals, people/companies/locations, equipment, ... . It's not easy to get teams to talk about it, but this stuff is going on all the way from big tech co's (Google, Uber, ...) to otherwise stodgy megacorps (chemicals, manufacturing, ..).

We're more on the viz (JS, GPU) + ai (GNN) side of these projects, and for use cases like the above + cyber/fraud/misinfo. If into it, definitely hiring, it's an important time for these problems.

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#18
I'm building a front end app for Wikipedia & Wikidata called Conzept encyclopedia (https://conze.pt) based on semantic web pillars (SPARQL, URIs, various ontologies, etc.) and loving it so far.

The semantic web is not dead, its just slowly evolving and and growing. Last week I implemented JSON-LD (RDF embedded in HTML with a schema.org ontology), super easy and now any HTTP client can comprehend what any page is about automatically.

See https://twitter.com/conzept__ for many examples what Conzept can already do. You won't see many other apps do these things, and certainly not in a non-semantic-web way!

The future of the semantic web is in: much more open data, good schemas and ontologies for various domains, better web extensions understanding JSON-LD, more SPARQL-enabled tools, better and more lightweight/accessible NLP/AI/vector compute (preferably embedded in the client also), dynamic computing using category theory foundations (highly interactive and dynamic code paths, let the computer write logic for you), ...

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#19
The entire movement felt like a massive tragedy of the commons. There is just no incentive for any single player to push the standard forward and the commercial players are already reaping enough benefits from Web 2.0 that putting more money in Semantic Web makes no sense.

Semantic Web was supposed to be the Web 3.0. It's so dead now that even its name is stolen by the blockchain. RIP.

Re: The semantic web is dead – Long live the semantic web

#20

Very well written introduction to some of the problems with semantic web dev. Personally I think the reason it died was there were no obvious commercial applications. There are of course commercial applications, but not in a way that people realize what they're using is semantic web. Of all the 'note keepers' and 'knowledge bases' out there, none of them are semantic web. Thus it has languished in academia and a few…

Very hard to make a business case because for the reasons you mentioned + the costs are very front-loaded because ontologies are so damn hard to build, even for very well-contained problems. Without a clear payoff, why bother
Post reply on HN