W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > December 2005

Re: same as relation

From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:28:33 +0100
Message-ID: <43A16F81.6020405@cs.vu.nl>
To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
CC: Luis Bermudez <bermudez@mbari.org>, public-esw-thes@w3.org

Hi,

A third option that comes to mind is to use the SKOS-MAP vocab [1].

You can use the skosmap:exactMatch to indicate that the concepts are 
the "same" for retrieval purposes without mixing up their associated 
data like when you use owl:sameAs.

Mark.

[1] http://www.w3c.rl.ac.uk/SWAD/deliverables/8.4.html

Bernard Vatant wrote:
> 
> Hello Luis
> 
> 
>>If I have two concepts from two different thesaurus, what is the
>>recommended approach to say that they are both the same concept ?
> 
> 
> Logical answer : if you have two concepts, they are not the same - otherwise you would
> have one concept.
> 
> Elusive answer : depends on what you mean by "same", and what you mean by "concept" :))
> 
> Developed answer : this is IMHO *the* most difficult issue to solve for the next steps of
> the Semantic Web (see [1] entirely dedicated to this).
> 
> Use case 1 : You have not yet assigned URIs in any of the thesauri, you are in the process
> to migrate them to SKOS, and you have the power to assign URIs for both : then use the
> same URI to identify the concept in the two thesauri. You have a single resource, and in
> fact a single concept, with possible different descriptions in each thesaurus. This opens
> questions about consistency of those two descriptions.
> 
> Use case 2 : You have not yet assigned URIs in the thesaurus A you manage, but have found
> another thesaurus B where URIs are assigned, and your concept "foo" looks like the same as
> the concept "bar" in thesaurus B. Two solutions come to mind:
> - Use the URI of "bar" to identify "foo".
> - Declare "foo" with a URI in your own namespace, and use owl:sameAs to declare identity.
> a:foo		owl:sameAs	   b:bar
> Those two solutions bear exactly the same semantics, which means everything you declare on
> a:foo is valid for b:bar, and the other way round. They represent the same concept because
> they are the same resource. Note that SKOS Guide does not recommend this kind of practice
> at all. See http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-guide-20051102/#secidentity.
> 
> The above approaches ties the semantics of a:fooX to the semantics of b:bar. There is an
> alternative approach I've been trying to push here [2] and there [3], and that maybe you
> would be interested in. If you want to keep formal semantics independent, and that
> same-ness of concept(s) represented by two or more resources is something more fundamental
> that the declared formal semantics of those resources, you would like simply to declare
> that a:foo and b:bar are two formal aspects of the same "a-semantic" concept, both
> providing a specific and partial description of it. The basic assumption underlying this
> approach is that there is no exhaustive formal description of a concept whatsoever, and
> that different, independent descriptions might be orthogonal, complementary, and possibly
> non-consistent.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Bernard
> 
> [1] http://universimmedia.blogspot.com
> [2] http://www.mondeca.com/lab/bernard/spek.rdf
> [3] http://www.mondeca.com/lab/bernard/hubjects.pdf
> 
> ----------------------------------
> Bernard Vatant
> Mondeca Knowledge Engineering
> bernard.vatant@mondeca.com
> (+33) 0871 488 459
> 
> http://www.mondeca.com
> http://universimmedia.blogspot.com
> ----------------------------------
> 
> 
>>-----Message d'origine-----
>>De : public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
>>[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]De la part de Luis Bermudez
>>Envoye : mercredi 14 decembre 2005 19:39
>>A : public-esw-thes@w3.org
>>Objet : same as relation
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>If I have two concepts from two different thesaurus, what is the
>>recommended approach to say that they are both the same concept ?
>>
>>Thanks for your help,
>>
>>Luis
>>
>>---------------------------------------
>>Luis Bermudez Ph.D.
>>Software Engineer
>>MMI Liaison - http://marinemetadata.org
>>bermudez@mbari.org
>>Tel:  (831) 775-1929
>>Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
  Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
        markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
Received on Thursday, 15 December 2005 13:33:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:54 GMT