Nepomuk Brings Semantic Web To the Desktop, Instead

An anonymous reader writes "Technology Review has a story looking at Nepomuk — the semantic tool that is bundled with the latest version of KDE. It seems that some Semantic Web researchers believe the tool will prove a breakthrough for semantic technology. By encouraging people to add semantic meta-data to the information stored on their machines they hope it could succeed where other semantic tools have failed."

Comments

Um, no thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

I've tried Symantec products in the past, and they are worse than actually having a virus. They slow your PC to a crawl, get their claws into every part of your computer, and are extremely difficult to purge when you finally give up on them.

As a KDE 4 user...

[orkybash]

I've tried out Nepomuk and, while I have to say that it's promising, it's got miles to go before it's even near ready. The main problem is application support. Sure, you can rate and tag and describe your files in the Dolphin file browser. So what? You can do the same in Vista. This doesn't mean anything if applications don't hook into this and make use of it. Of the apps I've used, Gwenview (a photo viewer) has Nepomuk partially implemented but it's buggy and you need to compile it yourself with it explicitly enabled (this will apparently change in KDE 4.2). Digikam, which allows you to rate, tag, and describe photos already, says that they have no plans of integrating with Nepomuk anytime soon. Amarok 2 has work towards a Nepomuk collection, but the devs say that this will always run along side the main, MySql-based collection and it's nowhere near ready yet. My email is in the cloud so I can't even begin to talk about KDE-PIM's support or lack thereof.

The other problem at the moment is a lack of ability to query your semantic data. Can I get anything to show all photos with my wife in them that I've rated four or above? Not at the moment. Hopefully this is coming in KDE 4.2, but as it stands at the moment it makes Nepomuk a case of write-only memory.

So, maybe something to get excited about in the future, but not quite yet.

Re:Care to explain?

[mcgrew]

I'm dubious

I have yet to see "semantic web" fully explained, but Wikipedia is giving some good insight into it, especially into its nebulousness. It is supposed to make web (or in this case, desktop) documents machine-readable.

TFA deals not with the Semantic Web, but rather the "semantic desktop". As it says, "Semantic Web researchers believe the tool will prove a breakthrough for semantic technology. By encouraging people to add semantic meta-data to the information stored on their machines they hope it could succeed where other semantic tools have failed".

HTML had "semantic tools" built in - keywords.
<meta meta name="description" content="Auto Mechanics">
<meta name="keywords" content="auto, mechanincs, wrench, sex, penis, tits, clit, boobs">

You see how it was abused. Any more advanced semantic tools will be similarly abused.

There are other problems, as the wikipedia article explains:

Practical feasibility
Critics question the basic feasibility of a complete or even partial fulfillment of the semantic web. Some develop their critique from the perspective of human behavior and personal preferences, which ostensibly diminish the likelihood of its fulfillment (see e.g., metacrap). Other commentators object that there are limitations that stem from the current state of software engineering itself (see e.g., Leaky abstraction).

Where semantic web technologies have found a greater degree of practical adoption, it has tended to be among core specialized communities and organizations for intra-company projects.[12] The practical constraints toward adoption have appeared less challenging where domain and scope is more limited than that of the general public and the World-Wide Web.[12]

[edit] An unrealized idea
The original 2001 Scientific American article by Berners-Lee described an expected evolution of the existing Web to a Semantic Web.[13] Such an evolution has yet to occur. Indeed, a more recent article from Berners-Lee and colleagues stated that: "This simple idea, however, remains largely unrealized."[14]

[edit] Censorship and privacy
Enthusiasm about the semantic web could be tempered by concerns regarding censorship and privacy. For instance, text-analyzing techniques can now be easily bypassed by using other words, metaphors for instance, or by using images in place of words. An advanced implementation of the semantic web would make it much easier for governments to control the viewing and creation of online information, as this information would be much easier for an automated content-blocking machine to understand. In addition, the issue has also been raised that, with the use of FOAF files and geo location meta-data, there would be very little anonymity associated with the authorship of articles on things such as a personal blog.

[edit] Doubling output formats
Another criticism of the semantic web is that it would be much more time-consuming to create and publish content because there would need to be two formats for one piece of data: one for human viewing and one for machines. However, many web applications in development are addressing this issue by creating a machine-readable format upon the publishing of data or the request of a machine for such data. The development of microformats has been one reaction to this kind of criticism.

Specifications such as eRDF and RDFa allow arbitrary RDF data to be embedded in HTML pages. The GRDDL (Gleaning Resource Descriptions from Dialects of Language) mechanism allows existing material (including microformats) to be automatically interpreted as RDF, so publishers only need to use a single format, such as HTML.

Re:Horrible name.

[Cornwallis]

Agreed. They ought to call it NepoGIMP. Now that's a name.

On the brighter side...

[Cyberax]

It's not as bad as GIMP :)

Re:Care to explain?

[radtea]

The Semantic Web is a failed attempt to extend the WWW via "semantic markup", which allows users/editors/etc to tag content (text, images, data) using a standard format that can be read, processed and exchanged by machines which can then give users more useful pointers to stuff that they care about.

The Semantic Web has failed for a bunch of reasons, with many people tending to blame the tools. However, those of us of a particular epistemological bent believe that it is doomed in principle as current conceived because "meaning" is a verb, not an adjective.

"These data mean X" is completely incoherent on this view of meaning, like saying "This smell of orange blossoms has Republican leanings." "Meaning" is simply not an attribute of data, any more than political tendencies are an attribute of scents.

The Semantic Web fails to capture almost everything about the entities that do the meaning (people) but instead is based on the belief that meaning is a property of data. Data inspires meaning, but meaning is something that humans do, and the Semantic Web has no effective mechanism for capturing this, although with sufficient markup by many individuals on the same data it should be possible to do something similar to ROC evaluation of the ways people mean, which would greatly enhance the utility of the Semantic Web.

A colleague who works in GIS pointed out an consequence of this phenomena to me many years ago when he described an experiment involving a bunch of geologists mapping a particular terrain. At the end of the day, after integrating all their inputs, he could tell who mapped where, but not what anybody mapped.

Re:Care to explain?

[Dynedain]

I've got a better reason why it failed that doesn't require delving into first year philosophy.

People are lazy. Look at any image database and figure out why it's difficult to find something. Because people don't want to spend 20 minutes filling in tags for a single image they just want to show off to their friends.

Now expand that to every other form of data type, and its easy to see why the semantic web never did, and never will take off without significant AI involvement.

Re:Horrible name.

[shadwstalkr]

Yes, I know that Nepomuk means "Networked Environment for Personalized, Ontology-based Management of Unified Knowledge" as stated in the article.

I assumed it was KumOpen (come open) backwards. I think the real acronym is even stupider than that.

You got that exactly backwards

[MarkusQ]

The Semantic Web is a failed attempt to extend the WWW via "semantic markup", which allows users/editors/etc to tag content (text, images, data) using a standard format that can be read, processed and exchanged by machines which can then give users more useful pointers to stuff that they care about.

You got that exactly backwards.

The WWW was an earlier doomed attempt at semantic markup, and up until the summer of '93 or so it looked like it might work. That's when the early rants about people using the tags to control layout instead of too convey meta information (e.g. using em to get italics in a bibliography, dt/dd to make roman numeral lists, etc.) started--or at least when I first became aware of them. In fact, pretty much the entire history of HTML has been a tension between the language's designers and purist, who want users to care about what markup means, even if it does nothing, and the vast majority of users who only care about what it does regardless of the "meaning" that may be ascribed to it. Once you can get your head around both perspectives some of the goofier things in the whole tawdry history (the Table Wars, XML, CSS) make a lot more sense.

Ok, a little more sense. But only if you already knew what people are like.

--MarkusQ

That's the idea.

[Balinares]

> ... the semantic web never did, and never will take off without significant AI involvement.

I understand that the point of Nepomuk is to allow for automated tagging by the standard tools of the KDE desktop. For instance, say you receive a picture from an IM contact who KDE also knows (through the address book framework, Akonadi) lives in Europe.

Then Nepomuk would allow you to make search queries as "Bring up all the pictures that people living in Europe sent me last week". Well, that's the theoretical goal anyway; we will see if they ever get there.

There's one nifty application already: you can create a Folder View plasmoid on your desktop, and instead of making it display ~/Desktop/ as usual, you can make it display the result of a query through the Nepomuk KIO slave. See here how it works.