| 35 | | The holy grail of web service interoperability is hampered along three axes: syntax, semantics and interface. In terms of core data syntax, bioinformatics tools consume and produce data in many different formats, some of which are loosely defined syntactically (e.g. legacy flat file formats). In addition, the semantics of what we are trying to do with data, and what we mean by encoding data in a certain way, are often loosely defined. Many file formats are abused and overloaded to add semantics to fields that weren't intended for that (e.g. in comments, definition lines, key/value fields). Lastly, there is a proliferation of interfaces, each of which probably make sense on their own (e.g. RESTful APIs) but they all aren't interoperable in a way that a machine can make sense of by itself. By adopting common standards to define syntax, semantics and interface, different service providers will be able to promote interoperability. Hence, this subgroup consists of people discussing the application of such technologies as WSDL, SAWSDL, OWL, RDF/XML (and other XML tools, i.e. XML schema, transforms). |
| 36 | | In addition to these technical arguments, there are also good philosophical arguments for formalizing our conception of the world. For example, as a researcher, this provides a formal way of sharing your knowledge with other people, thereby promoting reproducibility. |
| | 35 | The holy grail of web service interoperability is hampered along three axes: syntax, semantics and interface. In terms of core data syntax, bioinformatics tools consume and produce data in many different formats, some of which are loosely defined syntactically (e.g. legacy flat file formats). In addition, the semantics of what we are trying to do with data, and what we mean by encoding data in a certain way, are often loosely defined. Many file formats are abused and overloaded to add semantics to fields that weren't intended for that (e.g. in comments, definition lines, key/value fields). Lastly, there is a proliferation of interfaces, each of which probably make sense on their own (e.g. RESTful APIs) but they all aren't interoperable in a way that a machine can make sense of by itself. The semantic web is technically comprised of a stack of common standards and technologies that can be applied to these three axes of syntax, semantics and interface. By adopting these common standards different service providers will be able to promote interoperability. |
| | 36 | == Why the semantic web? == |
| | 37 | At a philosophical level, the semantic web enhances science because it forces us to clearly and formally define meanings, intentions and problems. This in turn promotes collaboration, reproducibility and more precise communication. At a technical level, the semantic web makes it easier to get other specialists' data and its computational meaning. Syntax is not enough for this, because syntax can be abused and misinterpreted - true tape safety and end-user usability depends on well-defined semantics. An additional technical benefit is that defining the semantics (i.e. what you mean, what you intend to do), you don't have to hardcode to a particular syntax; hence, web service components become more flexible. |
