Juan Chamero

Metodología Darwin

  • Aumentar el tamaño de la letra
  • Tamaño de letra predeterminado
  • Reducir el tamaño de la letra


Home Darwin versus W3C Visions - II

Darwin versus W3C Visions - II

Correo electrónico Imprimir PDF

Web Semantic

Darwin Vision versus W3C Vision- II

Darwin versus Tim Berners Lee Vision analysis

W3C versus Darwin, two polar approaches that could reinforce each other

Dr. Juan Chamero, Esta dirección electrónica esta protegida contra spambots. Es necesario activar Javascript para visualizarla , Buenos Aires, Argentina February 15th 2009



Darwin versus Tim Berners Lee vision

    This concept was born in the “The Semantic Web” article published in the Scientific American on May 2001 by Tim Berners Lee, the Web creator. For him the Semantic Web is an information space used by machines rather than humans. Instead of imagining processing and manipulating Web information via humans Lee imagined users sending their agents to the Web Ocean instead but proceeding systematically thru layers. This definition is oriented to a man – machine Communications realm but necessarily it should be coherent with a human–human communication system and embedded in its turn as a macro layer in an augmented human–machine–human communication system. Under this augmented and more realistic point of view the Web Semantic could be considered the study of “meanings” of all semantic creatures dispersed over the Web Ocean: documents. Darwin “sees” the SW as a binary coupled interacting system of two subsystems: the Web Ocean and Humans trying to enhance their knowledge in order to survive and evolve properly, in single words a huge collective learning system. Some humans to be known as “authors” put their seeds (documents) now and there in the Web Ocean motivated either by a natural passion to transcend or by solidarity or by both. These creatures are not alive like fishes are; they resemble “fossils” of a piece of knowledge because their meanings are frozen at the time of their sowing. However these pieces of knowledge have a “cognitive life” in the sense of their usefulness for other human beings. So from the point of view of cognition they could be considered equivalent lo living creatures except that they do not move by themselves.  For this reason Darwin ontology states that the whole stock of these Web creatures could be considered a sample of the Human Knowledge as frozen at a given time and named a sample of the “Established Knowledge” at a given time as well. So the EK, Established Knowledge should be considered a fossil in the sense that its validity is from the past to the present and only as a trustable Knowledge basement for the future. Where is then the seed of the future?. Where are then the new ideas and the necessary updating of everything?. Darwin ontology states that it rests on the people realm as Web users. In Kant and Spinoza terms the Web Ocean is a fiction of the Human Knowledge and the closest to their vision of truth rests on “people´s side”, users that interact thru Internet protocols with the Web Ocean. In this side ideas and potential seeds are continuously generated and bubble within people´s minds. People have at their reach a huge, universal, open and free learning system: the Web Ocean where the best “modal ideas” and meanings at a given time rest.  



TBL Vision and W3C in more detail

    This Consortium also known as World Wide Web or W3C is devoted to the creation of languages, tools and standards to implement the WS properly. Let´s make an introduction to them.


XML: Extensive Markup Language, a syntax model to define the content structure of documents without taking care/worrying about their meaning!. Derived from this syntax and even using XML specialized editors may be created such as XHTML, MathML, and MusicML, oriented to the Web, Mathematics and music respectively.  The following XML file is used in various samples throughout the Microsoft XML Core Services (MSXML) SDK.


<?xml version="1.0"?>
   <book id="bk101">
      <author>Gambardella, Matthew</author>
      <title>XML Developer's Guide</title>
      <description>An in-depth look at creating applications 
      with XML.</description>
   <book id="bk102">
      <author>Ralls, Kim</author>
      <title>Midnight Rain</title>
      <description>A former architect battles corporate zombies, 
      an evil sorceress, and her own childhood to become queen 
      of the world.</description>


It seems us that no further explanation is necessary for programmers to understand the XML nature.


XML Schema: is a language of schemes to define precisely all type of XML documents. It states how an XML documents should be. We depict below an example taken from W3CShcools to define precisely a shipping order:


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<shiporder orderid="889923"



<orderperson>John Smith</orderperson>


<name>Ola Nordmann</name>

<address>Langgt 23</address>

<city>4000 Stavanger</city>




<title>Empire Burlesque</title>

<note>Special Edition</note>





<title>Hide your heart</title>





The XML document above as a logical sub-tree consists of the root element, "shiporder” that contains a required attribute called "orderid". It is meaningful for any employee that has issued a shiporder. The "shiporder" element contains three different derived elements: "orderperson", "shipto" and "item". The "item" element appears twice, and it contains a "title", an optional "note" element, a "quantity", and a "price" element.

Note: The line above: xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" tells the XML parser that this document should be validated against a schema. The line: xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="shiporder.xsd" specifies WHERE the schema resides.

Even though this is a Little more complex it would be easily understood by any smart programmer specially if aided/guided by an XLMSchema constructor/editor. Up to herein I´m prone to applaud these two W3C initiatives as an acceptable quote of necessary IT&C “red tape”. .


RDF: Resource Description Framework is a language to model interrelated data at their turn presented in XML syntax. Let´s see the RDF example of the same school applied to a list of CD´s for sale:








Empire Burlesque

Bob Dylan





Hide your heart

Bonnie Tyler


CBS Records




<?xml version="1.0"?>





 rdf:about="http://www.recshop.fake/cd/Empire Burlesque">

  <cd:artist>Bob Dylan</cd:artist>







 rdf:about="http://www.recshop.fake/cd/Hide your heart">

  <cd:artist>Bonnie Tyler</cd:artist>


  <cd:company>CBS Records</cd:company>









With an almost straightforward “natural” meaning:

First line => It´s an XML declaration

Second line => the root name of declaration RDF

As there were rdf names with specific names as in any programming language lines 3 and 4 tell us that the RDF names must belong to the xmlns (XML name space) located in a specific file of the W3C portal and those of the particular space to which this declaration belongs will be located in a “fake” Website that supposedly deals with CD lists.

Line 5 uses the first name of the rdf space: “description” and we are aware of this fact because the prefix structure above mentioned rdf:Description about (a second permitted name) with an argument that tells us where is the CD theme located and its name “Empire Burlesque”.

Lines 6 to 10 are now easy to imagine: CD description by “artist”, “country”, “company”, “price”, and “year”.

Once finished a CD description follows next in the same way.


The same conclusions about the utility of XML and XMLSchema are valid for this tool. At large any smart programmer does pretty much the same and for this reason to encourage them to invest a little more of their time to use these tools whether they become universal and sufficiently tested will bring benefit to all the IT&C community. However it (becoming universal and sufficiently tested) will take its time.


Note: to see the status of this core W3C package (the necessary and sufficient trilogy XML, RDF, OWL?) we recommend to read The Scientific Publishing Task Force report



OWL: Ontology Web Languages, is a family of languages to represent the knowledge even tough restricted to the domain of digital computation and communications, A Web ontology is a set of axioms and/or conjectures that are valid fort certain “classes” of the Web space. 

OWL is designed for use by applications that need to process instead of structured objects for which meanings are known. It´s supported by previously defined above tools and at its turn it opens in three increasingly-expressive sublanguages: OWL Lite, OWL DL, and OWL full.


It´s important to emphasize here again that also OWL is essentially descriptive. For instance OWL Life provides efficient migration for” Thesauri and other taxonomies”. So it departs of knowing the Web Thesauri which has not being extracted from the Web yet!. We are facing the classic paradox of the egg and chicken: who is first. Concerning the Web we affirm undoubtedly the egg namely the Web Thesaurus.


OWL DL deals with all possible forms of computable logic in order to approach as much as possible to human thinking. Finally OWL full tries to cover all types of human text corpuses but without assuring their computability.



Imágenes Polls

Poll Darwin

Darwin puede ser usado para


Poll Semántico I

La Semántica es la

Poll Semántico II

La Web Semántica es una

Poll Semántico III

El Conocimiento Humano es:

Poll Semántico IV

El Tesauro Web es

Usuarios Online

Tenemos 6 invitados conectado


Home Darwin versus W3C Visions - II