7th AIS SigPrag International Conference on Pragmatic Web (ICPW 2012) at RuleML 2012 / ECAI 2012, Montpellier, France, 27-30 August 2012

1. The Pragmatic Web
(and its many relations)
Adrian Paschke Hans Weigand
Corporate Semantic Web Faculty of Economics
Freie Universität Berlin Tilburg University
Co-Chairs Pragmatic Web
www.pragmaticweb.info
7th AIS SIGPRAG International Conference Session on
Pragmatic Web
at
6th International Symposium on Rules
RuleML 2012
Montpellier, France, August 2012

2. The Semantic Web
• "The Semantic Web is an
extension of the current
web in which information is
given well-defined meaning,
better enabling computers
and people to work in
cooperation."
– Tim Berners-Lee,
James Hendler, Ora
Lassila, The Semantic
Web 2007 W3C Semantic Web Stack
• „Make the Web
understandable for
machines“
2

3. Core Semantic Technologies
1. Rules
– Describe conclusions and reactions from given information
(inference)
– Declarative knowledge representation:
“express what is valid, the responsibility to interpret this and
to decide on how to do it is delegated to an interpreter /
reasoner”
2. Ontologies
– Ontologies described the common knowledge of a domain
(semantics):
• “An ontology is an explicit specification of a
conceptualization “ T. Gruber
 Semantics interoperability between (connected)
vocabularies
3

4. Corporate Semantic Web
Corporate Semantic Web (CSW) is
used to describe the application of
Semantic Web technologies and
Knowledge Management
methodologies in corporate
environments.
4

5. Corporate Semantic Web
1. Application of Semantic Web technologies in
enterprise information systems (Semantic
Enterprise)
• Collaborative workflows and (business) process management
(e.g. Internet of Services, e-Science workflows, Semantic
Business Process Management)
• Knowledge Management
(e.g. Semantic Knowledge Management, Semantic Corporate
Memory, Semantic Ad-hoc BI and Semantic CEP)
2. Corporate = Business Context
• Application of Semantic Web technologies under economical
considerations and business conditions (e.g. cost models, return
on investment)
5

6. Corporate vs. Public Semantic Web
• Closed information systems / Intranet solutions
with known interfaces between systems,
services and domains
• Known user groups within enterprise network(s)
• Usage of the existing enterprise IT
infrastructure, information, and knowledge is
constrained by the existing business rules,
policies and workflows/processes
• Data view: closed, often (semi-)structured data
with known data models (e.g., relational,
object-oriented, XML, …)
• Logic view: partial closed world assumption,
partial unique name assumption, constructive
views
6

7. Social Semantic Web
The concept of the Social Semantic
Web subsumes developments in
which social interactions on the Web
lead to the creation of explicit and
semantically rich knowledge
representations. (Wikipedia)
7

8. Social Semantic Web vs.
Public/Corporate/Pragmatic Semantic Web
• Social Semantic Web = Web of collective
knowledge systems
• Focus: Tools in which the central social
interactions on the Web plays a role. These
tools lead to the development of explicit
semantic representations
• Combines technologies, strategies and
methods of the Semantic Web, Social
Software and Web 2.0
• Finds applications in Corporate Semantic
Web as well as Public Semantic Web and in
particular Pragmatic Web
8

9. Pragmatic Web
• The Pragmatic Web consists of the tools,
practices and theories describing why and
how people use information. In contrast
to the Syntactic Web and Semantic Web
the Pragmatic Web is not only about form
or meaning of information, but about
interaction which brings about e.g.
understanding or commitments.
(www.pragmaticweb.info)
9

10. Language Action Perspective
• The Language Action Perspective
(LAP) argues that language is not
only used for exchanging
information, (as in reports or
statements etc.) but also to perform
actions (as in promises, orders,
requests, and declarations etc)
(Schoop 2001; Weigand 2003).
10

11. The Pragmatic Web - Internet as a platform
of communication and coordination
• Distinguishing the physical event as such (happening
in time/space) from
– the value it has for humans / agents in terms of
commitments
– leading e.g. economic value
 The value aspect highlights the “why” of the coordination.
11

12. Organisational Semiotics
• Organisational semiotics examines
the nature, characteristics and
features of information, and studies
how information can be best used in
the context of organised activities
and business domains.
(Kecheng Liu et al. 2002)
12

13. Pragmatic Agent Web
The Pragmatic Agent Web utilize the
Semantic Web with multiple interacting
intelligent agents which collaborate on
the Web and put independent meta data,
ontologies and local data into a pragmatic
context such as communicative
situations, organizational norms, purposes
or individual goals and values. (Paschke
2007)
13

14. Pragmatic Agent Web
• Utilize the heterogenous Semantic Web resources, meta data
and meaning representations with intelligent agents and
web-based services with the ability to understand the
others intended meaning (pragmatic competence)
– Formal Logic Representation vs. (Controlled) Natural Language
Representation
• Collaborate in a communicative conversation-based
process where content and context is interchanged in terms
of messages (relation of signs) between senders and
receivers (interpreters/users).
– Loosley-coupled vs. de-coupled interactions
– Fixed negotiation and coordination protocols vs. free conversations
• Pragmatic layer/wrapper around semantic/content e.g. by
KQML / ACL like speech-act primitives (e.g. assert(content),
retract(content), query(kb))
– Model, negotiate and control shared and invividual meanings
 requires learning and knowledge adaption / updates
15

15. Conclusion: Challenges for the Pragmatic Web
Connectedness
Intelligence / Wisdom
understanding
Pragmatics
principles
Knowledge
Understanding
Sematics
patterns
Information / Content
Understanding relations Syntax
Data Ontologies Rules ??? Understanding
(Logic) (Logic) (Human Logic +
Machine Logic)
16

16. Understanding
Vision: Ubiquitous Pragmatic Web 4.0
Pragmatic Agent
Ecosystems
Ubiquitous Pragmatic Web 4.0
Machine
Pragmatic Web Connects Intelligent Agents and Smart
Things
Ubiquitous autonomic
Smart Services and
Things
Social Semantic Web 3.0,
Semantic Web Web of Services & Things,
Corporate Semantic Web
Connects People, Services and Things
Semantic Web 2.0
Syntactic Web Connects Knowledge
World Wide Web 1.0
Passive Active
Connects Information
Consumer
Agents
Producer
HTML
Smart
Content
XML
RDF
Monolithic
Deskto
Systems Era
p
Desktop Computing Syntactic Semantic Pragamtic
Web Web Web
Ubiquitous Next Generation Agents and Social Connections
17

17. The Pragmatic Web Research Community
www.pragmaticweb.info
Association for Information Systems Special Interest Group
"Pragmatic Web"
(AIS SIGPRAG)
http://www.corporate-semantic-web.de
AG Corporate Semantic Web
Freie Universität Berlin
http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/groups/ag-csw/