Danny Ayers in his ‘raw’ blog: ‘It’s my opinion that only a tiny proportion of the web needs to have rich Semantic Web capabilities for the web as a whole to gain significantly. A handful of superpeers could make a huge difference.’ He also advocates lots of small, local knowledge domain approaches.
You may already have seen that there’s a very interesting looking workshop taking place at MW2007. It sounds (and looks) as though their project has progressed quite some way (if you have Firefox 2, that is). I thought this paragraph was interesting:
Using multiple vocabularies is a baseline principle of our approach. It also raises the issue of alignment between the vocabularies. Basically, semantic interoperability will increase when semantic links between vocabularies are added. Within the Getty vocabularies one set of links is systematically maintained: places in ULAN (e.g., place of birth of an artist) refer to terms in TGN. Within the project we are Adding additional sets of links. One example is links between art styles in AAT (e.g. “Impressionism”) and artists in ULAN (e.g., “Monet”). The project has worked on deriving these semi-automatically from texts on art history.
Here’s another Dutch project presenting there: http://www.archimuse.com/mw2007/abstracts/prg_325001116.html
Nat Torkington maps out the future not only of Web 2.0 but also the Semantic Web. It’s looking good for Pokemon.