SEMANTIC WEB

materialized
by importing

T
CT
ABSTRA
the principles
of knowledge
representation
from
he everyday Artificial
Web has Intelligence.
experienced This paper is
changing an attempt to
trends since it unfold the
was technologies
introduced. that play their
We indigenous
sometimes role in the
refer to the Semantic
current phase Layer that
of the web as would silently
Web 2.0 position
enriched behind the
by current web as
an extension,
community yet producing
unpredictable
fostered changes in our
classification interaction
and with the
world. The
exploitation Semantic
of Web offers a
information. range of
As technology application
advances a areas,
step further, intelligent
common and
open automation
modeling of and
data forms the real-
basis of a new time scientific
web; the publishing
“Semantic being a few.
Web.” This (This
simple but futuristic face
radical idea is of the web has
been widely be “read” by
referred by humans while
the phrase they are
Web 3.0) I “displayed” by
also explain computers. We
here the then find
hurdles that pattern in this
still keep the data and
Semantic correlate (or
Web in unrelated) it
research labs, with some
which are other set of
however data, and this
almost at their process has its
solution. limits being
KEY WORDS
performed
Semantics, almost
Artificial manually.
Intelligence, Today, with
Web 3.0, HTML and a
Semantic tool to render
Search, it (say, a Web
Semantic browser or
Publishing, some other
RDF, Web user agent),
Ontologies. one can create
and present a
(I)
INTRODUCTION page that lists
items for sale.
We may The HTML of
describe the this catalog
World Wide page can make
Web (as we simple,
see it today) to document-
be a global set level
of inter-linked assertions such
documents. as "this
We refer to document's
these title is
documents as 'LookPretty'
WebPages and Superstore".
we may have But there is no
multimedia capability
components within the
interspersed HTML itself to
into them. assert
These unambiguousl
documents can y that, for
example, item spectrum of
number N802 possibilities in
is a Studio16 this context by
Face Wash adding an
with a retail “additional
price of 70 layer” of data
INR, or that it definitions and
is a cosmetic relationships
product. behind these
Rather, HTML documents.
can only say The vision of
that the span the Semantic
of text "N802" Web is to
is something extend the
that should be principle of the
“positioned” Web from
near "Studio16 documents to
Face Wash" data.[1] This
and "70 extension will
INR", etc. allow fulfilling
There is no more of the
way to say Web’s
"this is a potential, in
catalog" or that it will
even to allow data to
establish that be shared
"Studio16 effectively by
Face Wash" is wider
a kind of title communities,
or that "70 and to be
INR" is a processed
price. There is automatically
also no way to by tools as
express that well as
these pieces of manually. The
information Semantic Web
are bound facilitates
together in deployment of
describing a machine
discrete item, power in this
distinct from correlation and
other items usage of data.
perhaps listed At its core, the
on the page. Semantic Web
is comprised
The “Semantic of a
Web” philosophy, a
introduces a set of design
whole new
principles, and to the phrase,
a variety of “web of inter-
enabling connected
technologies documents”).
such as the It is an
Resource extension to
Description the current
Framework World Wide
(RDF), a Web in which
variety of data web content
interchange can be
formats, expressed not
notations and only in natural
the Web language, but
Ontology also in a
Language format that can
(OWL). [2] be
“understood”
In the next and “used” by
section the automated
underlying tools (often
philosophy of called as
the Semantic intelligent
Web is agents), thus
explained. permitting
Section (III) people and
elaborates the machines to
technologies find, share and
that make it a integrate
reality (RDF, information
OWL, etc.) more easily.
This is The following
followed by occurrences
the would help us
applications better
offered by the comprehend
Semantic Web the idea: The
and a few word
problems that “semantic” in
it faces. a general
(II) THE
context would
SEMANTIC be an adjective
PHILOSOPHY for something
The Semantic that makes
Web is a “web natural sense,
of interrelated such that
data” decisions can
(compare this be exercised
based upon ng with
this sense. In a each other
similar context and with
of computing, their users.
“semantic c) To
gap” is a introduce
phrase used for “interopera
a bility” in
distinguishing these
character relationshi
between the ps also in a
high-level way in
programming which they
languages and can be
the used in
machinelevel more than
language. one
context.
The “goals” of
the Symantec (III) BUILDING
Web can be BLOCKS

summarized as The Semantic

follows: Web is knitted
a) To with a set of
structure fundamental
the building
informatio blocks. The
n over the following are
web as the
logically technologies
inter- developed that
related help achieve
data. (The the above
formatting stated goals:
cues may
be placed
and
rendered
separately)
b) To
facilitate
the use of
this sea of
data by
intelligent
software
agents
collaborati
a) One major
RESOURCE
DE difference is
SC that, on the
RIP
TIO Semantic Web,
N such
FR
AM relationships
EW can be
OR
K
established
(RD between any
F)
AN
two resources,
D there is no
RD
F/X
notion of
ML “current” page.
Another major
RDF has difference is
evolved as a that the
general relationship
method of (i.e., the link)
modeling itself is named,
information, whereas the
through a link used by a
variety of human on the
syntax (traditional)
formats. It Web is not and
provides a their role is
specification deduced by the
to define and human reader.
describe the The definition
relations of those
among data relations allow
(i.e., for a better and
resources) on automatic
the Web. This interchange of
is not unlike data. RDF,
the usage of which is one
hyperlinks on of the
the current fundamental
Web that building
connect the blocks of the
current page Semantic Web,
with another gives a formal
one: the definition for
hyperlinks that
define a interchange.
relationship These
between the resources are
current page usually
and the target. addressed by a
Uniform <http://en.wik
Resource ipedia.org/wi
ki/India>
Identifier
(URI) which <http://purl.or
may or may g/dc/element
s/1.1/title>
not begin with
http: and yet "India"
may or may <http://en.wik
not be ipedia.org/wi
accessible via ki/India>
HTTP. <http://purl.or
g/dc/element
The s/1.1/publish
relationships er>
are expressed
"Wikipedia"
in a “subject-
In this
predicate-
example,
object” http://purl.org/dc
manner. The /elements/1.1/titl
subject of an e is a specific
RDF statement definition for
is a resource. the concept of
These RDF a title
statements are established by
written in the Dublin
various Core Metadata
serialization Initiative
methods which is an
including the example of
XML syntax controlled
(denoted by vocabularies
RDF/XML) imparted to
and the RDF. This
Notaion-3 simple data
format. can be utilized
(along with
Suppose we many other
want to assert sets of data)
that the article for performing
http://en.wikiped a “semantic
ia.org/wiki/India
search” by
has its “title”
intelligent
as “India” and
agents in an
is published by
attempt to say,
Wikipedia. In
organize all
the Notation-3
information
format, we
that Wikipedia
would write,
has on India!
Such for providing
relationships and restricting
lead to the the structure
formation of a and content of
“pseudo- elements
graph” inter- contained
connecting all within XML
concerned documents.
data. This RDF Schema
forms the idea is a vocabulary
behind Web for describing
Ontologies. properties and
b) classes of
XML RDF-based
SC
HE resources, with
MA semantics for
,
RD generalizedhie
F rarchies of
SC
HE such properties
MA and classes.
AN
D However these
TH vocabularies
E
WE
need to be
B provided with
ON
TO
extensibility
LO and
GY
LA
interoperabilit
NG y. OWL adds
UA more
GE
(O vocabulary for
WL describing
)
properties and
The above classes: among
stated data others,
modeling has relations
resources and between
relationship classes (e.g.
amongst these disjointness),
resources that cardinality
need to be (e.g. "exactly
defined and one"),
restricted. This equality, richer
is conveniently typing of
achieved by properties,
certain characteristics
“Schemas.” of properties
XML Schema (e.g.
is a language symmetry),
and Relational
enumerated databases are
classes. an important
c) SPARQL source. The
semantic web
The SPARQL server
is a protocol components (if
and query addressed in a
language for loose
semantic web language!)
data sources. attach to the
Its name is a existing
recursive system without
acronym that affecting its
stands for operation.
“SPARQL e) THE
Protocol and CLIENT
SIDE
RDF Query SEMAN
Language.” TICS
Compare this
to the To experience
Structured the Semantic
Query Web, the user
Language would require
(SQL) that is nothing more
popularly used than any of
in the today’s
traditional browsers. This
web. is because the
concept of
d) THE SERVER
SIDE semantic web
SEMAN brings about a
TICS
complete
The Servers of change in the
the Semantic way
Web would be information is
servers which presented,
expose most of which
existing data happens
systems using behind the
the RDF and scenes, not
SPARQL necessarily
standards. affecting the
Many way
converters to information is
RDF exist displayed. It
from different however
applications. ushers a new
(and in fact
unpredictable) realworld
user applications
experience. that arise from
the direct
However the impact it has
Semantic Web on the World
does facilitate Wide Web.
the Real Time
deployment of “Scientific
new Publishing” is
“intelligent being
software considered to
agents” that be the most
can perform important area
advanced and to benefit from
complex “Semantic
automated Publishing”.
tasks that can This directly
hardly be transforms
imagined in collaboration
the world of trends in Life
the traditional Sciences and
web. Health Care.
Also a range of Besides other
web-based areas expected
services (often to go through
with agents of the wave are:
their own) to
supply • Ambient
information Intelligenc
specifically to e
agents may • Semantic
come into the Search
arena (For and
example, a Indexing
Trust service • Cognitive
that an agent Systems
could ask if
some online • Data
store has a Integratio
history of poor n
service or • Multimedi
spamming). a Data
(IV) APPLICATION
Managem
AREAS ent
The Semantic • Software
Web offers Engineeri
many ng
 • Service- practical
Oriented grounds. [3]

Computin These hurdles

g can be
• Machine summarized in
Learning two folds -
A) THE
• eScience TOOLS
PROBL
• Informatio EM
n
Extraction Most of the
tools for
• Grid
building
Computin
semantically-
g
aware
• Peer-to- applications,
Peer or for adding
Systems semantics to
• eCommer information
ce are still in the
research phase
• eGovernm and were
ent designed for
• Bioinform expert
atics computer
scientists who
• Digital
specialize in
Libraries
knowledge
These again representation,
are only artificial
imaginable at intelligence,
this point of and machine
time as the learning.
Semantic Web B) THE
waits to realize ONTOL
OGY
its complete PROBL
potential. EM

(V) THE
CONSTRAINS
There are still
few widely
The obvious used or
reason that standardized
keeps the ontologies.
Semantic Web And getting
still in its people to agree
evolutionary on common
phase is the ontologies is
challenge that not generally
it faces on
easy. lived. The idea
Furthermore, behind
the world is Semantic Web
very complex is equally
and to simple, and
adequately perhaps, more
describe all the radical.
knowledge (VI) CONCLUSION
that comprises
what is Human
thought of as Reasoning is a
"common result of
sense" would certain
require a very relationships
large ontology. amongst
objects,
Efforts are at processes etc.
their full that we have in
momentum at our minds. The
the W3C and Semantic Web
many research can be said to
institutes to perform
make the similar
specifications reasoning
behind based upon the
Semantic Web relationships
easier to use that we define
and smoother in web data
to apply. through RDF.
These These
constrains are relationships
almost at the that we have
edge of their are also more
solution. or less
common to
The Semantic
many others in
Web is passing
the society,
through the
which makes
same phase
our reasoning
through which
of practical
the early web
sense to
went. When
others.
the
“hypertext” Similarly a
was introduced "common
it was a simple vocabulary of
yet radical idea relationships"
that changed is established
the way we for
interoperable
use through
Web
Ontologies. [2] “The
The OWL Semantic
provides a way Web” by
to enhance this Wikipedia, at
vocabulary. http://en.wikipe
dia.org/wiki/se
With these and
mantic_web [3]
many other
Ivan Herman
basic
(2007). “State
principles, the
of the
Semantic Web,
Semantic Web
the web of
- Semantic
data (in its
Days 2007” [4]
rightful sense),
“The Semantic
ushers
Web
amazing new
Revisited” by
ways in which
Nigel
we would use
Shadbolt, Tim
the web.
Berners-Lee
(V and Wendy
II) REFERANCES
[1] Tim Hall, IEEE
Berners-Lee, J. Intelligent
Hendler, and Systems 21(3)
O. Lassila, pp. 96-101,
“The Semantic May/June
Web,” 2006 -
http://eprints.ecs
Scientific
.soton.ac.uk/126
American, 14/01/Seman
May 2001, tic_Web_Revist
pp. 34–43 ed.pdf
http://www.scia
m.com/article.cf [5] FAQs-
m? http://www.w3.
id=thesemantic- org/2001/sw/S
web W-
FAQ
Figure ‐ Understanding the Semantic Web
Components (Gaurav Saraf)
Figure ‐ Emergence of the Semantic Search
(by Radar Networks)
Figure ‐ Generations of the Web (by Radar
Networks)