W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: vocabularies and data alignment

From: François Scharffe <francois.scharffe@inria.fr>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:59:47 +0200
Message-ID: <4A321903.2040106@inria.fr>
To: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
CC: Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>, Jerome Euzenat <Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr>

I think we all want to do the same thing: aligning vocabularies in order 
to enhance interoperability in the cloud. There is the top-down 
approach: aligning vocabularies first, and using the alignment to 
provide functionalities for the data. For example, if Google releases a 
dataset using their googlevocab ontology, we could use an alignment 
between it and FOAF to tell a link generator under which classes similar 
instances will be found. (advertisement: providing alignments is the 
task of the alignment server [1]).
With this experiment we want to go in the other direction, from data to 
vocabularies. We take this path by looking at link generator 
specifications, what they need as input, and see in what degree it would 
be possible to abstract this input as a kind of ontology alignment. This 
could provide functionalities such as aggregation, composition and 
verification of links and alignment (see detailed description [2]).


[1] http://aserv.inrialpes.fr/
[2] http://melinda.inrialpes.fr

Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> Hugh Glaser wrote:
>> Hi,
>> To put it in simple terms for me :-)
>> Are you after the algorithms we use to identify when two instances are 
>> the same?
> No, he isn't talking ABox.  He is talking TBox (data dictionary).
> I posted a link about a simple mapper ontology for Google's RDF vocabs 
> that basically prevent the innocent from using those terms
> and ending up down a swamp (to put things as mildly as possible).
> See: http://purl.org/NET/googlevocab#
> UMBEL is about doing this on bigger and broader scales :-) That's always 
> been the purpose of this project since inception.
> Kingsley
>> Best
>> Hugh
>> On 11/06/2009 12:57, "Franois Scharffe" <francois.scharffe@inria.fr> 
>> wrote:
>> Dear LODers,
>> There has been a couple of discussions already on this list on the need
>> for a vocabulary to represent correspondences between terms of different
>> vocabularies. We also saw recently various tools (e.g. Silk, ODDlinker)
>> allowing to automatically interlink datasets given a specification of
>> what should be linked.
>> However, there is currently no common way to publish and share this
>> information (i.e., not the links but the way to generate them, see [1]
>> for precision).
>> We are setting up an experiment [1] to see if it is possible to provide
>> useful services from this data. But for that purpose we need your help.
>> So this is a call for contribution: we are collecting any specification
>> of link generator for the LOD graph.
>> Of course, do not hesitate to comment on the idea or to tell us if you
>> want to be involved.
>> We promise a report on this by the end of summer (northern hemisphere :).
>> Cheers,
>> Franois
>> [1] http://melinda.inrialpes.fr

Received on Friday, 12 June 2009 09:00:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:15:57 UTC