W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > November 2009

Re: [Dbpedia-discussion] Using DBpedia resources as skos:Concepts?

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 18:57:53 +0000
Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, "Sandhaus, Evan" <sandhes@nytimes.com>, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-Id: <9204B53F-2E21-46EA-AF9F-3EC5114A9721@cyganiak.de>
To: Simon Spero <ses@unc.edu>

On 13 Nov 2009, at 18:38, Simon Spero wrote:
> unless an assertion could only
> refer to one entity and not the other, or must apply to all possible
> entities that the URI could denote, it is not possible to perform this
> disambiguation.  URIs are cheap; why not have two?

URIs are cheap, but agreement on URIs is expensive. I think there are  
clear advantages to being able to use the same URI in different  
contexts (e.g., SKOS and FOAF; or SKOS and RDFS class).

I like the criteria that you set up above for assertions about the  
“overloaded” resource: Either the assertion can only refer to one  
entity and not the other; or the assertion applies to all entities  
possibly denoted by the URI.

Richard


>
> Simon
> p.s.
>
> Since it's Gavagi Friday, here's a story about detached rabbit
> parts<http://reason.com/blog/2009/11/09/science-monday-vat-grown- 
> rabbi>.
> In a vat.  Capable of giving mild sexual gratification to a  
> warehouse full
> of rabbits. Lo, a trifecta!
Received on Friday, 13 November 2009 18:58:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:39:05 GMT