W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > October 2008

Re: LOD Constellation

From: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 10:20:16 +0100
To: Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
CC: "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <C50F96E0.2716A%hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>

Hi Mike.
Looking good.

On 06/10/2008 06:43, "Mike Bergman" <mike@mkbergman.com> wrote:

>
>
> Hi Gong,
>
> Gong Cheng wrote:
>> Hi Mike and All,
>>
>> Very interesting work! Class-level mappings are quite important to
>> domain-independent data integration, e.g., search engines like Falcons.
>
> Yes, we agree.  Falcons is consistently showing the right way to
> search and present this stuff.  I hope you see some new ideas
> about class mappings moving forward! :)
>
>>
>> And I still have some questions to be clarified. I've downloaded
>> "class_level_lod_constellation.csv", which gives relations between
>> ontologies rather than between classes. Are there any class-level mappings
>> available? And, how do you obtain such mappings? Is it just based on
>> explicitly stated axioms in ontologies, or based on any ontology matching
>> algorithms?
>
> Good questions and points.  I'm sure Fred will comment back as
> well in the morning and I hope others do as well on this ML.
>
> You are correct that we do not have a comprehensive inventory of
> specific class mappings.  However, we *do* for those that involve
> UMBEL:
>
> http://www.umbel.org/ontology/umbel_external_ontologies_linkage.n3
>
> As for the others shown on the LOD constellation diagram, we have
> ascertained there *are* class-level mappings but have not yet
> compiled the specific class-level assertions those non-UMBEL
> sources make.  That enumeration should be done.
Trying to understand exactly what is going on, from your post and the
blog...
If someone has made class-level assertions of equivalence (in some way), you
represent it.
If there are owl:sameAs assertions between instances of an UMBEL class and
instances of another class, then you make a link of the classes.

So this means that if there are owl:sameAs assertions between instances of
two non-UMBEL classes, you do not (yet?) represent that?

Is that far off?
Best
Hugh
Received on Monday, 6 October 2008 09:25:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:18 UTC