> > If the Semantic Web had addressed these three issues from the
> > beginning,
> > it would have been integrated into the mainstream of data processing
> > in
> > about 3 or 4 years. Today, we would have seen some truly spectacular
> > applications.
>
> Baloney. What evidence exists that the problem is technology, as
> opposed to cost, requirements, and politics (of putting data online)?
> Integrating/rationalizing heterogeneous data is hard work, and always
> has been (even when the data being integrated was *entirely* in
> relational databases).
>
> > The SemWeb still has a chance, but it has to be integrated with the
> > mainstream of data processing before it can become the mainstream."
>
> Certainly true. Let me offer a couple more truisms:
>
> The Semantic Web still has a chance given the number of dedicated and
> smart people working on it.
and on the other side of the coin, we have Twitter, removing <a> from the party
http://bit.ly/sMsfI3fd ought ot be enough for anyone
>
> The S*m*ntic W*b has *no* chance as long as those who believe in it
> don't develop their own specs and software that demonstrate all the
> purported advantage of doing it that way (whatever it is).
>
> --Frank
>
