Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

RDF and OWL Are W3C Recommendations

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the standardization-baby dept.

J1 writes "The World Wide Web Consortium today released the Resource Description Framework (RDF) and the OWL Web Ontology Language (OWL) as W3C Recommendations. RDF is used to represent information and to exchange knowledge in the Web. OWL is used to publish and share sets of terms called ontologies, supporting advanced Web search, software agents and knowledge management. Read the press release for the full list of twelve documents, read the testimonials, and visit the Semantic Web home page."

2 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Microsoft Reporting Services by janbjurstrom · · Score: 2, Troll
    Microsoft is trying to break into the reporting market by being generic to break the hold of the current slew of companies that hold the monopoly there with more proprietary solutions.

    Or "bait-and-switch-and-embrace-and-extend", as Microsoft calls it in internal communication.

    --
    668.5
  2. Re:This is good news by tiger99 · · Score: 0, Troll
    "A lot of W3C standards seem overlooked by some pretty big sites."

    Only because they are designed by morons who think that following the Convicted Monopolist is the One True Way, and are wilfully ignorant of the official standards. Some of them even use Frontpage, which must be about the worst web site development tool ever invented.

    All web sites are supposed to be viewable by anyone, so they need to be validated to W3C standards, not for compliance with a nasty, bug-ridden browser like Incompetent Exploder. The only room for argument is to which W3C standards you should work, because people with older or even text-only browsers ought not to be excluded.

    Ideally, no site would be allowed on the net unless it met the standards in force at the time.It would save a lot of trouble, and annoyance for users.

    People ought to complain to the webmasters of sites which are non-compliant to a serious degree. If enough people bother them, they will have to fix it eventually.

    Moves towards new standards, although not intrinsically a bad idea, need to be made carefully, so that alternative content is provided for those who can't access the new standards. That is very important. Unlike many things in life, the web has traditionally been inclusive, let us keep it that way, not make it exclusive.

    Most importantly, the Convicted Monopolist must be prevented from asserting any proprietary standards, he has already done far too much damage with his vile perverted versions of Java, Javascript, non-standard HTML and other seemingly smart ideas which just cause misery for those who need to be standards-compliant.